[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|505154(FE-SCITECH) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #73 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-23 02:04:03 EDT --- logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc13 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #75 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-23 18:54:21 EDT --- logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #74 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-23 18:53:20 EDT --- logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc13 |logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #67 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-15 11:03:36 EDT --- For F-11/12/13, when rebuild is done, please visit bodhi: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ and submit push requests. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #69 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-15 15:03:25 EDT --- logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #70 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-15 15:03:30 EDT --- logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #68 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-15 15:03:20 EDT --- logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #71 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-15 15:18:54 EDT --- Thank you. NOw closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #72 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-15 15:51:42 EDT --- NOw closing. Thanks for you help -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #63 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-14 03:24:23 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=406420) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=406420) Where to set fedora-cvs flag Would you check if the place marked in the attached png appear after you login to bugzilla? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #64 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-14 04:24:48 EDT --- Aha! Yes, it does. It works. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #65 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-14 04:49:32 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: logiweb Short Description: a system for electronic distribution of mathematics Owners: grue Branches: F-11 F-12 F-13 InitialCC: grue -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #60 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-10 02:58:47 EDT --- Please post pre-review results for mj on mj review request bug Done By the way I will check your pre-review later. Thanks. There were five points where I was in doubt what to do. They are marked QUESTION in the prereview. Two are license questions. One is what I should do when I cannot test building on PPC. And two are details. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #61 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-10 14:16:12 EDT --- Okay. Your pre-review seems good to some extent for initial comments. I will keep taking care of mj review request. --- This package (logiweb) is APPROVED by mtasaka --- Please follow the procedure written on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join from Install the Client Tools (Koji). Now I am sponsoring you. If you want to import this package into Fedora 11/12/13, you also have to look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT (after once you rebuilt this package on koji Fedora rebuilding system). If you have questions, please ask me. Removing NEEDSPONSOR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #62 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-10 15:54:25 EDT --- This package (logiweb) is APPROVED by mtasaka Please follow the procedure written on:... Now I am sponsoring you. Great. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715
--- Comment #57 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-09 16:54:50 EDT ---
Now I have done a pre-review of Bug 578290 : mj (mahjong)
I have built the source RPM for x86_64 and i386.
Running rpmlint on the binary packages causes no complaints.
Below I go through
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
step by step (rather mechanical - sorry - but I hape that
is a reasonable way to start).
Below, you means the packager.
For each comment I make below I have added one of the
following attributes after the comment:
ACTION The packager must do or say something
QUESTION I am in doubt what to do here
OK Selfexplanatory
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output
should be posted in the review.
I should mention that if you run rpmlint on the SRPM,
you will get several warnings about spelling errors
in the Swedish description, referring to words from
the English description. From what I can tell, this
is because of some bug in rpm, see bug 578299.
I only get two erros from rpmlint:
mj.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
You should clean $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in the %clean
section and in the beginning of the %install section.
Use rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. Some rpm configurations
do this automatically; if your package is only going
to be built in such configurations, you can ignore
this warning for the section(s) where your rpm
takes care of it.
mj.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
The BuildRoot tag isn't used in your spec. It must
be used in order to allow building the package as
non root on some systems. For some rpm versions (e.g.
rpm.org = 4.6) the BuildRoot tag is not necessary
in specfiles and is ignored by rpmbuild; if your
package is only going to be built with such rpm
versions you can ignore this warning.
Could you take a look at that?
[[NOTE: you means the *packager* in the line above]]
ACTION
MUST: The package must be named according to the
Package Naming Guidelines.
Naming guidelines are met.
But 'mj' is a *very* short name. There are only
26^2=676 package names which consist of two, small
letters, so I suppose such names are reserved.
The name matches the upstream tar-ball
(mj-1.10-src.tar.gz). Do you think upstream would
be willing to change name to e.g. mahjong-1.10
or mahjongg-1.10? Those names do not appear to be
taken yet. In particular, /usr/bin/mahjongg belongs
to gnome-games-2.26.3-1.fc11.x86_64.
ACTION
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package
%{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your
package has an exemption.
OK
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
The application is written in C but uses neither
$RPM_OPT_FLAGS nor %{optflags}
ACTION
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
says that one should use desktop-file-install (mj.spec does that)
and should also BuildRequire desktop-file-utils (mj.spec doesn't)
ACTION
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define
says that you should use %global instead of %define, unless
you really need only locally defined submacros within other
macro definitions (a very rare case). mj.spec contains
two instances of %define. Is that needed?
ACTION
Consider using
cp -p ../tiles-v1/tong* .
rather than
cp ../tiles-v1/tong* .
c.f. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps
ACTION
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora
approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines.
License in upstream tar file:
The programs are distributed under the GNU General
Public License, version 2, or at your discretion
any later version.
Part of the upstream tar file, however, is non-GNU.
The mj.spec file says:
# The bundled tiles have a non-commercial-use license. So instead we
# use GPL tiles from kdegames instead. The solution was suggested by
# Tom 'spot' Callaway in:
# http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2010-February/001109.html
As mentioned in tiles-v1/README it is questionable whether or
not the bundled tiles have a non-commercial-use license. Thus
it is questionable whether or not the tiles can be GNU GPL.
Tom 'spot' Callaway says the tiles are not GNU GPL.
Using GPL tiles from kdegames as indicated above seems like a
good idea. That guarantees that the tiles used are GPL.
But then I suppose the tiles-v1/ directory should be removed from
the source package since otherwise the source package will contain
tiles which are not GNU GPL.
ACTION
The upstream .c and .h files refer to the LICENSE file for license
information except lazyfixed.c, lazyfixed.h, vlazyfixed.c, and
vlazyfixed.h which refer to
GNU Lesser General Public License (any version).
Is that a problem?
QUESTION
In upstream .c and .h files, the author claims moral rights.
Does that have any effect? I found
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #58 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-09 17:07:12 EDT --- Please post pre-review results for mj on mj review request bug, not on this review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #59 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-09 17:08:42 EDT --- By the way I will check your pre-review later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #56 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-04-08 12:45:28 EDT --- Okay, when you have done one pre-review, please let me know it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #55 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-04-07 02:43:54 EDT --- So please try another package (or submit another review request) I now take a look at these: 506567 acl2- Automated reasoning system based on Common Lisp 537694 texmakerx - LaTex Editor 570803 crawl - Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup - a rogue-like game of exploration 543718 wxmacmolplt - A graphics program for plotting 3-D molecular structures and normal modes 576685 pekwm - A small and flexible window manager 578990 nimrod - A new statically typed, imperative programming Language 565251 coan- A commandline tool for simplifying the preprocessor conditionals in source code 578290 mj - Mah-Jong program with network option I picked nine packages yesterday evening (local time) more or less at random. One was taken this morning. I hope at least some of the packages above will stay open until I have had a chance to look at them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #54 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-25 06:32:27 EDT --- Version 0.2.8-10 is out. The new version is here: Spec: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-10.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Change: Requires and BuildRequires tex(latex) instead of texlive I will return when I have done a package review after Easter. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #53 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-24 02:56:13 EDT --- So please try another package (or submit another review request) OK. We have Easter here next week, but I will return after after that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #52 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-03-22 13:10:05 EDT --- Unfortunately scponly is already in Fedora and bug 575502 was closed as a duplicate. So please try another package (or submit another review request) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #51 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-21 11:52:28 EDT --- But before I accept this package, someone ... must sponsor you. OK ... (I am a candidate) ... Thanks ... For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines ... I'm not sure I know the packaging guidelines well enough yet, but I will make a try and hope I will learn while doing. You are the upstream of this software so maybe you are not interested in other pkgs on Fedora, however please at try to do a pre-review of at least one package of other person, or submit another review request. Maybe I should do both. I happen to have another candidate for packaging: the 'Logiweb demon' which, given a 'string' (a Logiweb reference) returns an http url for retrieving the bytes associated to the reference. The demon is in Logiweb-0.1.x but I took it out of Logiweb-0.2.x because only users who run their own Apache web-server can use the demon. The demon has these properties: - It must run as root. - It is invoked from an init script. - After initial setup, it drops privileges and runs as user 'logiweb'. - It does a chroot to protect its surroundings. - It interacts with the Apache web-server. - It communicates with logiweb demons on other machines via UDP. In the Fedora documentation I have read a warning somewhere that one should not package something like that in ones first rpm. But I could give it a try now. Concerning a package review, I have picked this one at random: Bug 575502 - Review Request: scponly - Limited shell for secure file transfers I have put myself on the CC List of that bug but otherwise done nothing. Do you think it would be reasonable if I go through that package, following the checklists? Or is there some other package you would suggest me to look upon? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #50 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-03-20 13:59:04 EDT --- For -9: Almost okay * BR for texlive related pkgs - For texlive related pkgs, please use virtual provides name for Requires/BuildRequires like (i.e. use BuildRequires: tex(latex)) or so. Now as this blocks NEEDSPONSOR: - NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few (or no) work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on my wiki page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mtasaka#B._Review_request_tickets (Check No one is reviewing) Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets You are the upstream of this software so maybe you are not interested in other pkgs on Fedora, however please at try to do a pre-review of at least one package of other person, or submit another review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715
--- Comment #49 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-19 17:38:48 EDT ---
Version 0.2.8-9 is out. The new version is here:
Spec: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec
SRPM: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-9.fc11.src.rpm
HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html
Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html
Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html
Changes:
/usr/share/doc/logiweb/examples/compile.sh no longer has execute permissions
The package now owns %{_docdir}/%{name}/
Following Section 1.6.2 of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/SecondaryArchitectures
I have added
ExcludeArch: ppc64
# ppc64 excluded because clisp is not available on ppc64
to rpmspec rather than using ExclusiveArch. Following
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/SecondaryArchitectures,
if bugs are reported against logiweb on secondary architectures I
will try to handle them and otherwise ExcludeArch on a case by
case basis. I hope that is a sensible interpretation of the status
of secondary architectures.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715
--- Comment #48 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-17 15:31:34 EDT ---
Now I will wait for the updated srpm.
It may take a few days. I experiment with qemu to get
ExcludeArch: ppc64
rather than
ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 ppc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #44 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-15 05:39:17 EDT --- Version 0.2.8-8 is out. The new version is here: Spec: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-8.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html fingerprint.lisp is now an empty file. When fingerprint.lisp is empty, the system uses reasonable defaults. 'ulimit -s unlimited' is now stated once and for all in %build in rpmspec. It seems that subshells inherit 'ulimit -s unlimited' as intended. ulimit has been removed from individual makefiles. On F-12 build fails on ppc... Is logiweb supposed to support ppc? It would be nice to know if the build succeeds now, but I think ppc should remain unsupported for now since I do not have access to ppc hardware for debugging. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715
--- Comment #45 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-03-15
14:03:28 EDT ---
Okay, now 0.2.8-2 compiles at least on
- F-13 i686/x86_64
- F-12 i686/x86_64/ppc
- F-11 i586/x86_64/ppc
Some notes:
* ExclusiveArch
- As currently clisp is not available on ppc64, you
should add
-
ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 ppc
-
or
-
ExcludeArch: ppc64
-
! The latter form does not exclude s390, sparc or so.
The former form limits the supported architecure to
%{ix86} x86_64 and ppc.
? src/lgc
- Well, what does the string on line 3 mean? Is this an arbitrary
string or is this string generated by some other process?
! This string seem to appear on
* ./src/lgc
* ./src/lgc.lgs
* ./src/boot/lgc/lgc.lgs
- Some other files (like ./src/testsuite/auto/autobase1.lgs or so)
also has some seemingly-random string. Would you explain how
these strings are generated?
? Requires
- I don't know this software well, however is texlive-latex, dvipdfm
needed for Requires? (from your comment 23, these don't seem
to be needed for Requires)
! rpmlint
logiweb.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/logiweb/examples/compile.sh
logiweb.i686: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/logiweb/examples/compile.sh
/bin/bash
- rpmbuild automatically checks shebang related dependency for installed
files when the files have executable permission.
For this package as compile.sh has executable permission its shebang
dependency
/bin/bash is automatically added to the rebuilt binary, which is perhaps
not needed.
You can supress these warnings by removing executable permission from
compile.sh
(i.e. chmod to 0644)
* Directory ownership issue
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories#Common_Mistakes
- Currently the following directories themselves are not owned
by any packages.
%{_docdir}/%{name}/
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #41 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-12 04:50:25 EST --- Version 0.2.8-7 is out. The new version is here: Spec: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-7.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html The new version seems to solve the i586/i686 build problem. It seems the problem was painfully trivial: I just had to add 'ulimit -s unlimited' two more places in the makefiles. I have used printf to confirm that the stack was close to overflow right before the segfault. The connection to architecture and amount of RAM seems to have been accidental. In an attempt to avoid repetition, the main makefile of the system now has an rpmtest4 target which builds i586/i686 using mock (rpmtest1 runs lint on the x86_64 rpm, rpmtest2 runs lint on source rpm, and rpmtest3 builds x86_64 using mock). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #40 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-03-04 06:20:06 EST --- For information: Now I have reproduced the 32 bit build problem using mock on an 8 gigabyte x86_64 machine. I have not been able to reproduce the problem on a 4 gigabyte x86_64 machine. I now continue searching for the cause. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #39 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-25 08:32:50 EST --- ... it seems that x86_64 builds are all successful on F-11/12/13 ... However i586/i686 build fails on F-11/12/13: Great! That narrows down the problem. Note that as listed on http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/hosts we builds i586/i686 rpms on 64 bits machine, which may be related to this issue Probably. But I suppose Koji builds i586/i686 rpms on 64 bit machines every day without problems, so there must be more to it. My build does massive amounts of malloc/free. Since the koji hosts have 8GB I wonder if malloc would allocate memory in the upper half of the 8GB and truncate the address to 32 bit or something like that. Or my program could do something equivalent. Like Koji, I also build i586/i686 on a 64 bit machine, but my machine has 4GB. I will now try to build i586/i686 rpms using mock on an 8GB F-11, and also try to install a Koji server to see if I can reproduce the problem that way. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #38 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-24 13:09:06 EST --- Well, there is no f11/i686 mock config file. Now I tried to use --override option to koji so as to once complete x86_64 build, and actually it seems that x86_64 builds are all successful on F-11/12/13: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2011696 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2011721 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2011765 However i586/i686 build fails on F-11/12/13: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2011719 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2011767 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2011813 Note that as listed on http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/hosts we builds i586/i686 rpms on 64 bits machine, which may be related to this issue -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #35 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-22 05:16:17 EST --- Unfortunately (for me) stdint.h seems perfectly sound. So here is yet another try. Sorry. I have directed output to stderr and increased verbosity in the hope that the cause of the segfault will show up in the build log. Spec URL: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-6.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #36 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-22 10:48:16 EST --- Hi, this time: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2005834 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #37 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-22 17:36:41 EST --- Hi, this time: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2005834 The build log is bad news. Contrary to the issues that have been solved thanks to your help, this bug may be difficult to locate. So I need to reproduce the bug on my own machine. Could I ask you for one more favour: to try to build for x86_64 without building for i686? It would be a great help to know if the problem is related to the i686 build. Using mock, I have built the following on my fc11 machine: fc11/x86_64 fc11/i586 fc12/x86_64 fc12/i686 Unfortunately, they all build without errors, so I have not managed to reproduce the bug that way. My fc11 has no mock config file for fc11/i686, so I have not tried that. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support it looks as if fc11 supports i586 and fc12 supports i686. But http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2005834 points to these architectures: * buildArch (logiweb-0.2.8-6.fc11.src.rpm, x86_64) (canceled) * buildArch (logiweb-0.2.8-6.fc11.src.rpm, i686) (failed) So it seems that one can build for i686 on fc11 somehow. Do you happen to know where to get a fc11/i686 mock config file? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #33 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-21 10:24:24 EST --- Version 0.2.8-5 is out. The new version is here: Spec URL: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-5.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html 0.2.8-5 prints some extra debug information (sizes of various pointer and integer types). Furthermore, all debug output now goes to stderr. I have two questions: --- In the build logs pointed to by http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995837 when a command is executed, the output to stderr is printed before the output to stdout. Furthermore, when the Segmentation fault occurs, stdout is discarded. That makes it difficult to see exactly when the fault occurs. The behaviour to print stderr and stdout separately seems to be mock behaviour. At least I see the same behaviour when I use mock to build the package in a clean chroot. Do you happen to know a way to tell mock to put stdout directly into the build log so that one can see what happens up to the Segfault? Otherwise I will just try to find a work-around. --- Another question: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995837 points to buildArch (logiweb-0.2.8-4.fc11.src.rpm, x86_64) and buildArch (logiweb-0.2.8-4.fc11.src.rpm, i686) where the latter dies on a Segmentation fault and the former seems to be killed by a Sigint. Does the Sigint come from a manual ctrl-C to cancel the x86_64 build or is it something I should look into? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #34 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-21 11:18:44 EST --- This time: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2003115 (In reply to comment #33) Do you happen to know a way to tell mock to put stdout directly into the build log so that one can see what happens up to the Segfault? I really don't know Does the Sigint come from a manual ctrl-C to cancel the x86_64 build or is it something I should look into? When build fails in one architecture, build processes on other architectures are actumatically killed if they are still in progress so you don't have to look into. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #30 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-20 08:46:54 EST --- Version 0.2.8-4 is out. The new version is here: Spec URL: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-4.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Version 0.2.8-4 is a temporary version which prints debugging information at each garbage collection. Computation of amount of physical RAM has been corrected. 'Heap too small, goodbye' error message has been changed to 'Ran out of physical RAM, giving up'. Hopefully, that prevents this build failure: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995837 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #32 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-20 18:34:18 EST --- Once again sorry the package does not just build smoothly. I will look into this problem. I noticed one thing, however, in http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2001323 In bytes: info.totalram 2044669 info.mem_unit 4096 In cells: info.totalram 170389 info.mem_unit 4096 Since 2044669/170389=12 it means that type 'cell' in lgwam.c is 12 bytes. A 'cell' consists of three pointers, so one pointer is 4 bytes or 32 bits which is bad when the computer has 8 gigabyte. For pointers I do not use 'real' pointers. Rather, I use uintptr_t from stdint.h, where a uintptr_t is the type of an unsigned integer large enough to hold a pointer. So the problem could be in stdint.h. I will make a new version which makes a sanity check on uintptr_t. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #28 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-19 10:54:54 EST --- Scratch build result here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1999525 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #29 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-19 16:52:30 EST --- Scratch build result here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1999525 Thanks. That reveals a bug in my computation of memory size. I have only tested on machines where sysinfo counts memory in bytes. Sorry. I will correct the bug now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #26 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-18 04:13:00 EST --- Well, I cannot see where ulimit -s unlimited is called: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995766 Sorry. I can see I made a mistake when building the package. I will build it again. By the way when I explicitly call ulimit -s unlimited, build dies on another point. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995837 The lgwam: Heap too small, goodbye. message indicates that the lgwam abstract machine has malloced more than 90 percent of the physical RAM of the machine. When that happens, lgwam gives up since otherwise lgwam would malloc virtual memory and the moment lgwam mallocs virtual memory, it will make the host machine start trashing. lgwam uses sysinfo to find out how much physical RAM the machine has. My guess would be that either the host machine has less than 2 gigabyte physical RAM or that sysinfo returns a wrong RAM size. In any case, I will repackage so that ulimit is included properly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #27 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-18 14:45:32 EST --- Version 0.2.8-3 is out. The new version is here: Spec URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-3.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Version 0.2.8-3 is a temporary version which prints debugging information at each garbage collection. Furthermore, the build error I made when compiling 0.2.8-2 should be corrected so that ulimit is called. Hopefully, that prevents this build failure: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1980267 ulimit problem Furthermore, it may narrow down the cause of http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995837 Heap too small -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #23 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-17 03:15:12 EST --- Well, explicitly calling $ ulimit -s unlimited makes build proceed a bit longer: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1992518 Thanks. I can include a 'ulimit -s unlimited' in the makefile. That may fail if stack is limited because as far as I know, bash can only reduce stack size. But at least a build error from ulimit will tell what was wrong. This time observes a different build failure. Would you look into this? Yes. I will produce a new package which BuildRequires vim-common to get xxd (VIM is a rather large system to BuildRequire just to get the small xxd program, but VIM seems to be the place to get xxd. This is in line with Cygwin build requirements, by the way). By the way it seems Requires: texlive-latex, dvipdfm should be BuildRequires. You are right. texlive-latex and dvipdfm are not *needed*, but BuildRequiring them would avoid lots of warnings. Thanks for the help. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #24 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-17 17:20:35 EST --- Version 0.2.8-2 is out. The new version is here: Spec URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-2.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Now the build process does 'ulimit -s unlimited' and BuildRequires vim-common, texlive-latex, and dvipdfm. Hopefully, that prevents these build failures: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1980267 ulimit problem http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1992518 BuildRequires problem -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-18 01:46:20 EST --- Well, I cannot see where ulimit -s unlimited is called: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995766 By the way when I explicitly call ulimit -s unlimited, build dies on another point. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1995837 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #21 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-16 16:55:03 EST --- In all likelihood, the problem with http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1980267 is that bash stack size is limited. The only way I have managed to provoke a Program stack overflow is to issue ulimit -s 1 and then build the RPM. That makes my build fail at the same step as the Koji build above. ulimit -s 10 works. I use ulimit -s unlimited. Forget Comment 20 where I spoke about allocating more stack. The makefiles allocate plenty Lisp stack, which is unrelated to the program stack problem. All this happens to be in line with CLISP documentation: http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/faq.html#faq-stack Googling for koji and ulimit I found no more than http://koji.rutgers.edu/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1671 --- Now I have two questions: Do you happen to know if koji limits the bash stack size (i.e. the number printed by ulimit -s). If yes, do you know a way that I can increase the bash stack size under Koji? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #22 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-16 19:47:26 EST --- Well, explicitly calling $ ulimit -s unlimited makes build proceed a bit longer: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1992518 This time observes a different build failure. Would you look into this? By the way it seems Requires: texlive-latex, dvipdfm should be BuildRequires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #19 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-12 11:03:11 EST --- Well, this time build fails with the reason I don't know... Would you debug again? http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1980267 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #20 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-12 17:51:39 EST --- OK. Unfortunately, the Program stack overflow error is one I have seen often. It is one of the reasons I wanted to get rid of CLISP. The countermeasure to the program stack overflow is to allocate more stack without exhausting the memory of the computer and to ensure that the shell does not limit stacksize (ulimit -s unlimited in bash). I will try to guess why the stack overflow occurs despite the measures in the makefiles and make a new version. Once again sorry for the inconvenience. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #18 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-09 05:42:31 EST --- Version 0.2.8 is out. The new version is here: Spec URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.8-1.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Now the build process survives redirection of stdout. Hopefully, that prevents this build failure: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=190 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #17 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-07 06:09:43 EST --- I am sorry my package gives rise so many problems. The problem seems to be: The current CLISP (the one used by Fedora) dies if stdout is redirected. Koji obviously redirects stdout (e.g. to produce build.log). I do not redirect stdout, so I did no notice the problem. I will now search for a solution so that the build process survives redirection. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-06 12:41:52 EST --- Well, would you examine this build failure? http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=190 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #15 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-02-05 19:02:57 EST --- Version 0.2.7 is out. The new version is here: Spec URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb.spec SRPM URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/logiweb-0.2.7-1.fc11.src.rpm HTML URL: http://logiweb.eu/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://logiweb.imm.dtu.dk/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html Mirror: http://topps.diku.dk/logiweb/1.0/doc/download/rpm.html I apologize for the inconvenience here. No problem. Including CLISP sources could end up being very convenient anyway. Version 0.2.7 builds from source using CLISP as required. The package still includes pages.c, but if one deletes pages.c, then the make files regenerate pages.c from source using CLISP. %build in rpmspec deletes pages.c and then invokes make. Thus, %build builds from source using CLISP as required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)| --- Comment #14 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2010-01-25 11:15:44 EST --- Given that the components necessary to generate the pages.c code from the CLISP source are available in Fedora, I would say that this package doesn't qualify for the bootstrapping exception, and that the CLISP should be included and binaries like pages.c generated from source. I apologize for the inconvenience here. We have traditionally only permitted the bootstrapping exception in cases where a package is dependent on pre-built binaries to get an initial build done, but future builds are generated from pure source. In this case, without the CLISP binaries, every build would be dependent on pre-built binaries. Lifting FE-Legal, but please be sure to include and use the CLISP sources before approving/importing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-18 12:04:52 EST --- Once setting FE-Regal to ask spot how to package this software. spot, would you comment on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #12 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-01-17 08:53:49 EST --- So it means that compiling logiweb needs bootstrapping? Yes. Here is the procedure for bootstrapping: mkdir ~/foo cd ~/foo Download logiweb-0.1.10.tar.gz tar zxf logiweb-0.1.10.tar.gz cd logiweb-0.1.10/ make build The 'make build' target first compiles the lgc compiler using CLISP and then makes the lgc compiler compile itself. Furthermore, 'make build' generates a complete Version 0.2.6 with changelogs and everything. The result of 'make build' is in ~/foo/logiweb-0.1.10/lgc/build/self. 'make build' takes 15 minutes on my 3GHz machine. Ignore the diff: ../lgc: No such file or directory error message at the end of 'make build'. Running 'make build' includes running a testsuite. Running that testsuite could be omitted, reducing the run time to about 10 minutes. Here is the procedure for verifying that Version 0.2.6 is what it claims to be: cd ~/foo Download logiweb-0.2.6.tar.gz tar zxf logiweb-0.2.6.tar.gz diff -r logiweb-0.1.10/lgc/build/self/ logiweb-0.2.6/ The output from diff shall be empty. If so, please do bootstrap during rpmbuild. Does that mean that you prefer rpmbuild to run 'make build' of logiweb-0.1.10 instead of the present solution which uses a pre-built pages.c ? I made Logiweb-0.2.x to become independent of CLISP so that it became easier to port Logiweb to other platforms. And it was my hope that the procedure above for verifying that Version 0.2.6 is what it claims to be would allow to include the pre-built pages.c in the source RPM rather than including the whole collection of CLISP sources. But it is of course not up to me to decide what Fedora prefers. If you want, I can make a new version in which CLISP is included in the build requirements and in which the source RPM contains no pre-built binaries like pages.c. When you enable bootstrap in the spec file, I can ask spot if your method is acceptable on Fedora. Thanks. Just to be sure, is it correct that spot=Tom 'spot' Callaway or is spot some Fedora committee? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #10 from Klaus Grue g...@diku.dk 2010-01-16 11:39:16 EST --- Umm... I don't know if we can say src/pages.c is actually a source code... It seems it is very hard to modify this file manually. src/pages.c is not source code. It is compiled code which has been run through xxd so it is, in effect, a pre-built binary. That is not allowable according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines : Section 1.4: No inclusion of pre-built binaries or libraries was it not for the exceptions in Section 1.4.1. If this file generated by some other program or so? Yes. pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.6 is generated by Logiweb-0.2.5 pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.5 is generated by Logiweb-0.2.4 pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.4 is generated by Logiweb-0.2.3 and so on. However, generating pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.6 by compiling and installing all previous versions of Logiweb one by one could be tedious. For that reason, I have made a backport in the form of Logiweb-0.1.10. Logiweb-0.1.10 contains no pre-built binaries. It can be compiled using the open source CLISP system. pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.6 can be generated by Logiweb-0.1.10. Finally, pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.6 can be generated by Logiweb-0.2.6 itself. The versions of pages.c generated by Logiweb-0.1.10, Logiweb-0.2.5, and Logiweb-0.2.6 are byte identical. The problem here is that the Logiweb compiler lgc is written in the Logiweb programming language lgs. So one needs a Logiweb compiler in order to compile the Logiweb compiler. The gcc compiler has the same problem: gcc is written in C. To compile gcc, one needs a C-compiler. Typically, gcc is compiled using the previous version of gcc. Now, what is src/pages.c? That is quite simple. It is a compiled version of the Logiweb compiler version 0.2.6. That compiled version is able to run on the Logiweb abstract machine (lgwam) and it is able to compile itself. So why can Logiweb-0.2.6 claim to be open source? Well, my claim is that since Logiweb-0.1.10 is open source and can be compiled by the open source CLISP system and is able to generate pages.c of Logiweb-0.2.6, then Logiweb-0.2.6 is open source. I think that is what is covered by Section 1.4.1 of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
