[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview - WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qt6-qtwebview -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview - WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 Jan Grulich changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |qt6-qtwebview- WebView |qt6-qtwebview - WebView |component |component -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
--- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa ---
> %{_qt6_libdir}/libQt6WebView.so.6*
> %{_qt6_libdir}/libQt6WebViewQuick.so.6*
The soname glob isn't quite right, it should be "6{,.*}".
Cf.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files
But this can be fixed on import.
Everything else is good, so...
PACKAGE APPROVED.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946
___
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, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1877006] Review Request: smf-spf - Mail filter for Sender Policy Framework verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877006 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Kadlčík --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5383892 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-1877006-smf-spf/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05383892-smf-spf/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877006 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 --- Comment #7 from Jan Grulich --- >[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > Note: Directories without known owners: > /usr/lib64/cmake/Qt6Qml/QmlPlugins This should be fixed in qt6-qtdeclarative. > [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Fixed. > qt6-qtwebview.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long Qt WebView provides a way > to display web content in a QML application without necessarily Fixed. Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6-qtwebview/qt6-qtwebview.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6-qtwebview/qt6-qtwebview-6.4.2-1.fc38.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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1877006] Review Request: smf-spf - Mail filter for Sender Policy Framework verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877006 --- Comment #16 from Jordi Sanfeliu --- (In reply to Jordi Sanfeliu from comment #15) > (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #11) > > Package approved. - Please, find the latest .spec and SRPM versions here Spec URL: https://ftp.fibranet.cat/smf-spf/smf-spf.spec SRPM URL: https://ftp.fibranet.cat/smf-spf/smf-spf-2.5.1.061e937-1.fc36.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877006 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 --- Comment #6 from Jan Grulich --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #5) > Also note that your BR: ninja-build isn't being used, since you're not > passing in "-GNinja" to cmake. From macros.qt6: >%_qt6_build_tool ninja > >%if "%_qt6_build_tool" == "ninja" \ >-GNinja \\\ >%else \ >-G"Unix Makefiles" \\\ >%endif \ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2121585] Review Request: janus - An open source general purpose WebRTC server.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 --- Comment #58 from Jakub Kadlčík --- Created attachment 1941456 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1941456=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 5303569 to 5382837 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2121585] Review Request: janus - An open source general purpose WebRTC server.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 --- Comment #59 from Jakub Kadlčík --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5382837 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2121585-janus/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05382837-janus/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165448] Review Request: google-noto-sans-cjk-fonts - Google Noto Sans CJK Fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165448 --- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) --- Found it https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-cjk/releases/download/Sans2.004/03_NotoSansCJK-OTC.zip Please use this URL. Also as upstream has started using version numbers, good to use that, so Version: 2.004 With this change, you need to add obsoletes and provides to SPEC file and drop conflicts: I think this package should provide 2 subpackages per family google-noto-sans-cjk-fonts google-noto-sans-mono-cjk-fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165448 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165448] Review Request: google-noto-sans-cjk-fonts - Google Noto Sans CJK Fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165448 Akira TAGOH changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ta...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH --- Why do you not follow the upstream versioning to package it? that would cause a confusion. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165448 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2121585] Review Request: janus - An open source general purpose WebRTC server.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 --- Comment #57 from Renich Bon Ciric --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #56) > a) devel packages should have header files and .so libraries, other library > files .so.1 and .so.1.1.2 should be in main packages. Should the plugins > have devel packages? If not, plugin libraries should not be on ld path. A > method of listing private libraries which may work is described at: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/169190.html Hey Benson, nice to read you. :D Well, I failed to see which the listing method was. I've added the __provides_exclude_from and __requires_exclude_from macros to all .so files to avoid looking for dependencies there since they, indeed, are private libraries. (event handlers, loggers, plugins and transports). If you think I need to create devel packages for every plugin and include the .so files there, I will. No problem. I might've understood wrongly what you said. > b) no-documentation warnings are fine OK. Phew! > c) Ok on duplicates at this point. Can address this after other issues. It > is likely there are minor differences in the files. OK. > d) > rpmlint -e file-contains-date-and-time > file-contains-date-and-time: > Your file uses __DATE__ and __TIME__ which causes the package to rebuild when > not needed. > > rpmlint -e file-contains-current-date > file-contains-current-date: > Your file contains the current date, this may cause the package to rebuild in > excess. > > > Doxygen does not add a timestamp: > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/docs/janus-doxygen. > cfg#L1219 > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/docs/janus-doxygen. > cfg#L1846 > > However, footer has a date: > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/docs/footer.html#L16 I've created a patch to remove the date from the footer. I'll include it in the next build. Hopefully, that takes care of most of the messages. > For record_play not sure what is causing this error: > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/plugins/ > janus_recordplay.c I see there is an example date written in an example, right after the note: https://janus.conf.meetecho.com/docs/recordplay.html That might be triggering the warning, right? > For version, maybe it is better to get GitHub CI to generate this > information and have it distributed: > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/version.h > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1704907/how-can-i-get-my-c-code-to- > automatically-print-out-its-git-version-hash/1843783#1843783 version.c gets auto-generated after `make`. it's even ignored in .gitignore to this end. I have no idea of how it gets generated but, when it does, it has the current date. [root@bc8d0dcfefb2 janus]# cat src/version.c #include "version.h" const char *janus_build_git_sha = "e8d1395d3de9caa5e244605ec1a7281cd7d3ecf1"; const char *janus_build_git_time = "Wed Feb 1 05:08:47 UTC 2023"; int janus_version = 1102; const char *janus_version_string = "1.1.2"; const char *libnice_version_string = "0.1.19"; > It seems one can set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH as an optional parameter before using > autogen > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/Makefile.am#L178 > However, having this information in the release would likely enable more > efficient automated builds. I didn't really understand what you meant here. We should pass this SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH env var to autgen? Which date should we provide? The commit's date? OK, I know where version.c gets generated. Right bellow the link you gave me: https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/Makefile.am#L183. With gawk. :D What do we do with this? > e) Raised an issue on gethostbyname > https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/issues/3156 Thank you very much for the help. :D > f) Further comments: > i) Consider adding make as a build dependency, cmake will bring it in, but > one might consider builds without cmake Done. It's been added to BuildRequires. > ii) Would it be better to use BoringSSL > https://boringssl.googlesource.com/boringssl/ instead of OpenSSL Well, the message in their own website is discouraging. "Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is.". I'd rather stick to openssl unless you think boring is better. The updated SPEC and SRPM: SPEC: https://renich.fedorapeople.org/janus/janus.spec SRPM: https://renich.fedorapeople.org/janus/janus-1.1.2-3.fc37.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 ___ 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:
needinfo canceled: [Bug 1936727] Review Request: ignition-common - AV, Graphics, Events, and much more
Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Rich Mattes has canceled Package Review 's request for Rich Mattes 's needinfo: Bug 1936727: Review Request: ignition-common - AV, Graphics, Events, and much more https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936727 --- Comment #6 from Rich Mattes --- I am still interested in packaging this software. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1936727] Review Request: ignition-common - AV, Graphics, Events, and much more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936727 Rich Mattes changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(richmattes@gmail. | |com)| --- Comment #6 from Rich Mattes --- I am still interested in packaging this software. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936727 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165410] Review Request: Catch2 - A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com --- Comment #11 from Neal Gompa --- This package was already in Fedora as catch: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/catch -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2133080] Review Request: python-nss - Python bindings for Network Security Services (NSS)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133080 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-315afd98ee has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133080 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166007] Review Request: budgie-backgrounds - Default backgrounds for Budgie Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ Status|ASSIGNED|POST --- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa --- The only real issue I see is that the spec text alignment in the preamble (the stuff before "%prep") is inconsistent. I'd like to see that cleaned up when you import. Otherwise though, this looks good to me! 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166007] Review Request: budgie-backgrounds - Default backgrounds for Budgie Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007
--- Comment #3 from Neal Gompa ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0
1.0". 29 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck
in /home/ngompa/2166007-budgie-backgrounds/licensecheck.txt
[-]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
/usr/share/backgrounds/budgie(budgie-desktop), /usr/share/gnome-
background-properties(desktop-backgrounds-basic, f31-backgrounds-
gnome, f33-backgrounds-gnome, gears-backgrounds, f30-backgrounds-
gnome, f32-backgrounds-gnome, fedora-workstation-backgrounds,
f34-backgrounds-gnome, f35-backgrounds-gnome, neon-backgrounds,
f29-backgrounds-gnome, solar-backgrounds, fedorainfinity-backgrounds,
f36-backgrounds-gnome, f28-backgrounds-gnome, f37-backgrounds-gnome)
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
Note: Could not download Source2: https://serebit.com/openpgp/git-at-
serebit-dot-com.asc
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/SourceURL/
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of
[Bug 2165448] Review Request: google-noto-sans-cjk-fonts - Google Noto Sans CJK Fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165448
--- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) ---
You can drop below lines which are not needed in this SPEC file as there is no
doc files to install.
%global fontdocs *.txt
%global fontdocsex%{fontlicenses}
Use %autosetup instead of just %setup in SPEC file
What is the source URL to download the Source0 archive? if possible can it be
added there?
--
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165448
___
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, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166007] Review Request: budgie-backgrounds - Default backgrounds for Budgie Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa --- Taking this 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1901306] Review Request: tlpi - Utilities to display namespaces and control groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2023-01-31 20:42:15 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-902128f1c5 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1901306] Review Request: tlpi - Utilities to display namespaces and control groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-902128f1c5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-902128f1c5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 --- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa --- Also note that your BR: ninja-build isn't being used, since you're not passing in "-GNinja" to cmake. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2161113] Review Request: libopenshot - Library for creating and editing videos
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161113 --- Comment #6 from Neal Gompa --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #5) > Catch2 should be available shortly: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/Catch2 This was already in Fedora as catch: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/catch -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161113 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2161113] Review Request: libopenshot - Library for creating and editing videos
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161113 --- Comment #5 from Benson Muite --- Catch2 should be available shortly: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/Catch2 -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161113 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2150240] Review Request: celestia-data - Data, models and textures for Celestia
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150240 --- Comment #7 from Benson Muite --- Thanks it built https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5378433 There is one warning that may need to be fixed: celestia-data.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided celestia Checking license will end up at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/ see https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/107 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150240 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2160539] Review Request: python-types-docutils - Typing stubs for docutils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160539 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Fixed In Version||python-types-docutils-0.19. ||1.2-2.fc38 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Last Closed||2023-01-31 18:12:24 -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160539 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166009] Review Request: python-rstcheck-core - Checks syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1276941 (fedora-neuro) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941 [Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166009] Review Request: python-rstcheck-core - Checks syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Blocks||2074630, 1276941 ||(fedora-neuro) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941 [Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2074630 [Bug 2074630] python-rstcheck-6.1.1 is available -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165410] Review Request: Catch2 - A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 --- Comment #10 from Benson Muite --- Thanks. If ok, prefer the long form as it allows me to know what is included more easily, though it is a bit harder to read. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165410] Review Request: Catch2 - A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/Catch2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165410] Review Request: Catch2 - A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410
Sandro Mani changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
--- Comment #8 from Sandro Mani ---
Approved - I'd just suggest simplifying
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2
%{_includedir}/catch2/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/benchmark
%{_includedir}/catch2/benchmark/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/benchmark/detail
%{_includedir}/catch2/benchmark/detail/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/generators
%{_includedir}/catch2/generators/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/interfaces
%{_includedir}/catch2/interfaces/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/internal
%{_includedir}/catch2/internal/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/matchers
%{_includedir}/catch2/matchers/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/matchers/internal
%{_includedir}/catch2/matchers/internal/*.hpp
%dir %{_includedir}/catch2/reporters
%{_includedir}/catch2/reporters/*.hpp
to just
%{_includedir}/catch2/
for better readability.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410
___
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, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166007] Review Request: budgie-backgrounds - Default backgrounds for Budgie Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Kadlčík --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5377494 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2166007-budgie-backgrounds/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05377494-budgie-backgrounds/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166009] Review Request: python-rstcheck-core - Checks syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Kadlčík --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5377505 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2166009-python-rstcheck-core/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05377505-python-rstcheck-core/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166009] New: Review Request: python-rstcheck-core - Checks syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 Bug ID: 2166009 Summary: Review Request: python-rstcheck-core - Checks syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sanjay.an...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-rstcheck-core/python-rstcheck-core.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-rstcheck-core/python-rstcheck-core-1.0.3-3.fc38.src.rpm Description: Library for checking syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it. Fedora Account System Username: ankursinha -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166009] Review Request: python-rstcheck-core - Checks syntax of reStructuredText and code blocks nested within it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 --- Comment #1 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=96924568 -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166009 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2166007] New: Review Request: budgie-backgrounds - Default backgrounds for Budgie Desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 Bug ID: 2166007 Summary: Review Request: budgie-backgrounds - Default backgrounds for Budgie Desktop Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jos...@buddiesofbudgie.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/JoshStrobl/fedpkg-budgie-backgrounds/master/budgie-backgrounds.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/JoshStrobl/fedpkg-budgie-backgrounds/raw/master/budgie-backgrounds-1.0-1.fc38.src.rpm Description: Default set of background images for the Budgie Desktop URL: https://github.com/BuddiesOfBudgie/budgie-backgrounds Fedora Account System Username: joshstrobl -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166007 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1901306] Review Request: tlpi - Utilities to display namespaces and control groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tlpi -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1901306] Review Request: tlpi - Utilities to display namespaces and control groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 --- Comment #15 from Göran Uddeborg --- Thank you for the review! I'll do the last changes you suggested and request a repo now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1877006] Review Request: smf-spf - Mail filter for Sender Policy Framework verification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877006 --- Comment #15 from Jordi Sanfeliu --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #11) > Package approved. Hello, I'm tired to wait upstream to release the new version, so I thought I'll go ahead with the latest commit 2.5.1+061e937. I get the following message after requesting the distgit repository: $ fedpkg request-repo smf-spf 1877006 Could not execute request_repo: The Bugzilla bug is not approved yet The people on #fedora-devel at Libera.Chat kindly told me that the review is only valid for some time (3 months?). So, can you please, re-approve this package? Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877006 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946
--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= 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]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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", "*No copyright* BSD 3-Clause License",
"GNU Free Documentation License v1.3", "GNU General Public License,
Version 2", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 3", "*No
copyright* [generated file]", "BSD 3-Clause License", "GNU Library
General Public License v2 or later". 156 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/ngompa/2165946-qt6-qtwebview/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners:
/usr/lib64/cmake/Qt6Qml/QmlPlugins
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
/usr/lib64/qt6/examples(qt6-qtserialbus-examples, qt6-qtnetworkauth-
examples, qt6-qtwebengine-examples, qt6-qtsensors-examples,
qt6-qtscxml-examples, qt6-qtserialport-examples, qt6-qt3d-examples,
qt6-qtcharts-examples, qt6-qtbase-examples, qt6-qtvirtualkeyboard-
examples, qt6-qtpositioning-examples, qt6-qtwebsockets-examples,
qt6-qtconnectivity-examples, qt6-qtmultimedia-examples,
qt6-qtdeclarative-examples, qt6-qtdatavis3d-examples, qt6-qttools-
examples, qt6-qtsvg-examples, qt6-qtquick3d-examples,
qt6-qtwebchannel-examples, qt6-qtremoteobjects-examples)
[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.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 --- Comment #3 from Jan Grulich --- Fixed. Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6-qtwebview/qt6-qtwebview.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6-qtwebview/qt6-qtwebview-6.4.2-1.fc38.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 --- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa --- This package doesn't build. The build log indicates there is a missing dependency: -- Could NOT find XKB (missing: XKB_LIBRARY XKB_INCLUDE_DIR) (Required is at least version "0.5.0") -- Found WrapVulkanHeaders: /usr/include -- Configuring done CMake Error at /usr/lib64/cmake/Qt6Gui/Qt6GuiTargets.cmake:98 (set_target_properties): The link interface of target "Qt6::GuiPrivate" contains: XKB::XKB but the target was not found. Possible reasons include: * There is a typo in the target name. * A find_package call is missing for an IMPORTED target. * An ALIAS target is missing. Call Stack (most recent call first): /usr/lib64/cmake/Qt6Gui/Qt6GuiConfig.cmake:62 (include) /usr/lib64/cmake/Qt6/Qt6Config.cmake:167 (find_package) CMakeLists.txt:12 (find_package) -- Generating done -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Taking this 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 Jan Grulich changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1917559 (qt6-reviews) Alias||qt6-qtwebview Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917559 [Bug 1917559] Qt6-related package review tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165946] New: Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 Bug ID: 2165946 Summary: Review Request: qt6-qtwebview- WebView component Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jgrul...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6-qtwebview/qt6-qtwebview.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6-qtwebview/qt6-qtwebview-6.4.2-1.fc38.src.rpm Description: Qt WebView provides a way to display web content in a QML application without necessarily including a full web browser stack by using native APIs where it makes sense. Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165946 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2160539] Review Request: python-types-docutils - Typing stubs for docutils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160539 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-types-docutils -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160539 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2160539] Review Request: python-types-docutils - Typing stubs for docutils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160539 Sandro changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Sandro --- (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #4) > (In reply to Sandro from comment #3) > > I've filed this now: > > https://github.com/python/typeshed/issues/9621 Looks like the license file will be included in an upcoming release. Looks good now. Package is 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160539 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2165410] Review Request: Catch2 - A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 --- Comment #7 from Benson Muite --- Thanks for the review. Rebuilt. spec: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/Catch2/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05374311-Catch2/Catch2.spec srpm: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/Catch2/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05374311-Catch2/Catch2-devel-3.3.1-1.fc38.x86_64.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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165410 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2134972] Review Request: sdubby - shimming utilities for systemd-boot, like grubby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2134972 --- Comment #14 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek --- > It should be possible to rpm -qf, and more importantly, rpm -Vf absolutely > everything in the boot path. This does not work currently and is not intended to work. It currently does not work because the initrds are generated locally, so 'rpm -Vf' cannot check their contents. More broadly, the ESP (or XBOOTLDR) are intended to be shared between installations in dual boot scenarios, and one of those installations should just ignore the other ones. If boot counting [1] is implemented (and there are good reasons to do that), the boot count is part of the file name, and this just can't be handled by 'rpm -Vf'. [1] https://github.com/uapi-group/specifications/blob/main/specs/boot_loader_specification.md#boot-counting Hardcoding of /boot and /boot/efi is problematic because there are good reasons to swith a different path in the future. If we do that, effectively we'll have to support multiple layouts — both the new one, but also the old one for compatibility. Locking ourselves into a specific layout via packaging now is borrowing trouble. > including the creation of that simlink required to assure that kernel > upgrades work That symlink is NOT required for kernel upgrades to work. It is used by 'make install' in local kernel builds. Kernel package scripts use kernel-install. > Are you signing up to add this functionality to systemd-boot, or merge this > stuff there? I cannot give a blanket promise to merge things. I can promise to review pull requests and maybe work on some feature requests. At this point, I don't quite understand what is missing from sd-boot. If there's some general bug or missing feature, we'll do our best to solve it like any other issue. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2134972 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 1901306] Review Request: tlpi - Utilities to display namespaces and control groups
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 Petr Menšík changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(pemensik@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #14 from Petr Menšík --- please use %make_build CFLAGS="$CFLAGS" LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS" instead of just make to pass default rpm hardening flags to the build. Otherwise it looks good. and use install -p where possible, it should make unmodified files keep their last modified time. Otherwise yes, that is how I thought about it. Thanks, looks good to me! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901306 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2121585] Review Request: janus - An open source general purpose WebRTC server.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 --- Comment #56 from Benson Muite --- a) devel packages should have header files and .so libraries, other library files .so.1 and .so.1.1.2 should be in main packages. Should the plugins have devel packages? If not, plugin libraries should not be on ld path. A method of listing private libraries which may work is described at: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/169190.html b) no-documentation warnings are fine c) Ok on duplicates at this point. Can address this after other issues. It is likely there are minor differences in the files. d) rpmlint -e file-contains-date-and-time file-contains-date-and-time: Your file uses __DATE__ and __TIME__ which causes the package to rebuild when not needed. rpmlint -e file-contains-current-date file-contains-current-date: Your file contains the current date, this may cause the package to rebuild in excess. Doxygen does not add a timestamp: https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/docs/janus-doxygen.cfg#L1219 https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/docs/janus-doxygen.cfg#L1846 However, footer has a date: https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/docs/footer.html#L16 For record_play not sure what is causing this error: https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/plugins/janus_recordplay.c For version, maybe it is better to get GitHub CI to generate this information and have it distributed: https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/version.h https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1704907/how-can-i-get-my-c-code-to-automatically-print-out-its-git-version-hash/1843783#1843783 It seems one can set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH as an optional parameter before using autogen https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/blob/master/src/Makefile.am#L178 However, having this information in the release would likely enable more efficient automated builds. e) Raised an issue on gethostbyname https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway/issues/3156 f) Further comments: i) Consider adding make as a build dependency, cmake will bring it in, but one might consider builds without cmake ii) Would it be better to use BoringSSL https://boringssl.googlesource.com/boringssl/ instead of OpenSSL -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2161558] Review Request: perl-Alien-Brotli - Find and install the Brotli compressor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161558 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Alien-Brotli -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161558 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
