[Bug 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/ WPA2-PSK key cracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894 Igor Gnatenko changed: What|Removed |Added Alias|pyrit | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: pyrit - |Review Request: pyrit - A ||GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK ||key cracker -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 elad changed: What|Removed |Added CC||el...@doom.co.il --- Comment #1 from elad 2011-03-30 02:03:31 EDT --- I'll do an unofficial review. -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894
--- Comment #2 from elad 2011-03-30 02:30:47 EDT ---
+ = OK
- = NA
? = issue
+ Package meets naming guidelines
+ Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistent macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
? License
+ License field in spec matches
+ License file included in package
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
- Sources match upstream md5sum:
- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
- Package has a correct %clean section.
- Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
- Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- .la files are removed.
- Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file
+ Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
+ Package has no duplicate files in %files.
+ Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
+ Package owns all the directories it creates.
+ No rpmlint output. (looks like bogus output to me):
pyrit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
pyrit.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpyrit/_cpyrit_cpu.so
_cpyrit_cpu.so()(64bit)
pyrit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrit
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
+ final provides and requires are sane
SHOULD Items:
- Should build in mock.
- Should build on all supported archs
- Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
+ Should have dist tag
+ Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
Issues:
1.I'm not sure, probably I'm wrong, but GPLv3 with openssl exception is not
listed here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
Not an issue, but I think you should fix it:
The hyphen after "many-core" in the description is unnecessary. Also I think
you should mention that this package only provide CPU support, and not GPUGPU
(there are CUDA and OpenCL support sub-packages available upstream, but can not
be used in fedora because no free driver currently implements those features)
--
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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net Blocks||563471(FE-SECLAB) -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||knabberknusperh...@yahoo.de --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter 2011-04-04 11:26:56 EDT --- *** Bug 530806 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Michal Ambroz changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||pyrit -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Garrett Holmstrom changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||gho...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Garrett Holmstrom 2011-06-08 17:01:35 EDT --- Review of pyrit-0.4.0-1.fc15: The dump files and dictionary in pyrit-0.4.0/test are considered content, but the license under which they are distributable is unclear. I recommend asking upstream for clarification. If the license is acceptable, is the content itself considered acceptable for inclusion in a Fedora SRPM? Packaging-wise, please fix the permissions and RPM Provides of _cpyrit_cpu.so. AFAIK the build also needs to either honor Fedora's CFLAGS or justify its failure to do so. Note that distutils respects the CFLAGS environment variable. The remaining issues, specifically man pages and translations, are optional. See below for a full review. Mandatory review guidelines: NO - rpmlint output pyrit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee pyrit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://pyrit.googlecode.com/files/pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found pyrit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee pyrit.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpyrit/_cpyrit_cpu.so _cpyrit_cpu.so()(64bit) pyrit.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpyrit/_cpyrit_cpu.so 0775L pyrit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrit -- The spelling-error and invalid-url complaints appear to be bogus. ok - Package meets naming guidelines ok - Spec file name matches base package name ok - License is acceptable (GPLv3+ with exceptions) ok - License field in spec is correct The file "pyrit" has no license header; assuming GPLv3+ ok - License files included in package %docs or not included in upstream source ok - License files installed when any subpackage combination is installed ok - Spec written in American English ok - Spec is legible ok - Sources match upstream unless altered to fix permissibility issues Upstream MD5: 7258b6f3dacfb09736ddeed2a379df2d pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz Your MD5: 7258b6f3dacfb09736ddeed2a379df2d pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz ok - Build succeeds on at least one supported platform ok - Build succeeds on all supported platforms or has ExcludeArch + bugs filed ok - BuildRequires correct -- - Package handles locales with %find_lang -- - %post, %postun call ldconfig if package contains shared .so files ok - No bundled system libs -- - Relocatability is justified ok - Package owns all directories it creates ok - Package requires other packages for directories it uses but does not own ok - No duplicate files in %files unless necessary for license files NO - File permissions are sane -rwxrwxr-x /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpyrit/_cpyrit_cpu.so ok - Each %files section contains %defattr ok - Consistent use of macros NO - Sources contain only permissible code or content test/*.gz has no associated content license. -- - Large documentation files go in -doc package ok - Missing %doc files do not affect runtime -- - Headers go in -devel package -- - Static libs go in -static package -- - Unversioned .so files go in -devel package -- - Devel packages require base with fully-versioned dependency ok - Package contains no .la files -- - GUI app installs .desktop file w/desktop-file-install or has justification ok - Package's files and directories don't conflict with others' or justified ok - File names are valid UTF-8 Optional review guidelines: no - Query upstream about including license files No license for test/*.gz no - Translations of description, Summary ok - Builds in mock ok - Builds on all supported platforms ok - Functions as described -- - Scriptlets are sane -- - Non-devel subpackage Requires are sane -- - .pc files go in -devel unless main package is a development tool ok - No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin no - Man pages included for all executables ok - Package with test-suite executes it in %check section Packaging guidelines: ok - Has dist tag ok - Useful without external bits ok - Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir, /usr/target, /run -- - Programs launched before FS mounting use /run instead of /var/run -- - Binaries in /bin, /sbin do not depend on files in /usr ok - Changelog in prescribed format ok - Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags no - Correct BuildRoot tag on < F10/EL6 This prevents building for epel-5. no - Correct %clean section on < F13/EL6 This prevents
[Bug 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #5 from knabberknusperh...@yahoo.de 2011-06-09 14:35:35 EDT --- Upstream here. The license-issue regarding the dump-files has also been discussed for inclusion in Debian6. To resolve, I've contacted the original owners of these files and have written permission to include them in Pyrit's distribution (under the terms of the GPLv3+). The README refers to that in the License-section. The file dict.gz is not mentioned but falls under then same agreement as wpa2psk-linksys.dump.gz and wpapsk-linksys.dump.gz -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #6 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-08 17:03:35 EDT --- Added filtering, optflags, description cleanup: Spec URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/pyrit.spec SRPM URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/pyrit-0.4.0-2.fc15.src.rpm -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894
--- Comment #7 from Garrett Holmstrom 2011-08-18
14:29:32 EDT ---
Most everything looks good. Just fix the permissions on _cpyrit_cpu.so and
that should do it.
Review of pyrit-0.4.0-2.fc15:
Mandatory review guidelines:
NO - rpmlint output
pyrit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
pyrit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
pyrit.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpyrit/_cpyrit_cpu.so 0775L
pyrit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrit
--
The spelling-error warnings are bogus. Man pages are optional.
ok - Package meets naming guidelines
ok - Spec file name matches base package name
ok - License is acceptable (GPLv3+ with exceptions)
ok - License field in spec is correct
The file "pyrit" has no license header; assuming GPLv3+
ok - License files included in package %docs or not included in upstream source
ok - License files installed when any subpackage combination is installed
ok - Spec written in American English
ok - Spec is legible
ok - Sources match upstream unless altered to fix permissibility issues
Upstream MD5: 7258b6f3dacfb09736ddeed2a379df2d pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz
Your MD5: 7258b6f3dacfb09736ddeed2a379df2d pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz
ok - Build succeeds on at least one supported platform
ok - Build succeeds on all supported platforms or has ExcludeArch + bugs filed
ok - BuildRequires correct
-- - Package handles locales with %find_lang
-- - %post, %postun call ldconfig if package contains shared .so files
ok - No bundled system libs
-- - Relocatability is justified
ok - Package owns all directories it creates
ok - Package requires other packages for directories it uses but does not own
ok - No duplicate files in %files unless necessary for license files
NO - File permissions are sane
-rwxrwxr-x /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cpyrit/_cpyrit_cpu.so
ok - Each %files section contains %defattr on EL4
ok - Consistent use of macros
ok - Sources contain only permissible code or content
-- - Large documentation files go in -doc package
ok - Missing %doc files do not affect runtime
-- - Headers go in -devel package
-- - Static libs go in -static package
-- - Unversioned .so files go in -devel package
-- - Devel packages require base with fully-versioned dependency
ok - Package contains no .la files
-- - GUI app installs .desktop file w/desktop-file-install or has justification
ok - Package's files and directories don't conflict with others' or justified
ok - File names are valid UTF-8
Optional review guidelines:
ok - Query upstream about including license files
no - Translations of description, Summary
ok - Builds in mock
ok - Builds on all supported platforms
ok - Functions as described
-- - Scriptlets are sane
-- - Non-devel subpackage Requires are sane
-- - .pc files go in -devel unless main package is a development tool
ok - No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin
no - Man pages included for all executables
ok - Package with test-suite executes it in %check section
Packaging guidelines:
ok - Has dist tag
ok - Useful without external bits
ok - Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir, /usr/target, /run
-- - Programs launched before FS mounting use /run instead of /var/run
-- - Binaries in /bin, /sbin do not depend on files in /usr
ok - Changelog in prescribed format
ok - Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags
no - Correct BuildRoot tag on < F10/EL6
This prevents building for epel-5
no - Correct %clean section on < F13/EL6
This prevents building for epel-5
ok - Requires correct, justified where necessary
ok - Summary, description do not use trademarks incorrectly
ok - All relevant documentation is packaged, tagged appropriately
ok - Documentation files do not have executable permissions
ok - %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise
-- - Package with .pc files Requires pkgconfig on < EL6
ok - Useful -debuginfo package or disabled and justified
ok - No static executables
ok - Rpath absent or only used for internal libs
-- - Config files marked with %config
-- - %config files marked noreplace or justified
-- - No %config files under /usr
-- - SysV-style init script
ok - Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names where appropriate
ok - Spec uses macros for executables only when configurability is needed
-- - %makeinstall used only when ``make install DESTDIR=...'' doesn't work
ok - Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time
-- - Spec uses %{SOURCE#} instead of $RPM_SOURCE_DIR or %{sourcedir}
ok - %global instead of %define where appropriate
-- - Package containing translations BuildRequires gettext
-- - File timestamps preserved by file ops
-- - Parallel make
ok - Spec does not use Requires(pr
[Bug 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #8 from knabberknusperh...@yahoo.de 2011-08-21 09:24:11 EDT --- Upstream here. Please notice that the test-suite will run tests on Pyrit's sql-backend if python-sqlalchemy is available. This package should therefor also be in 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #9 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-23 17:05:09 EDT --- Fixed perms on library file (0755) Added python-sqlalchemy to BR for tests Spec URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/pyrit.spec SRPM URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/pyrit-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894
Garrett Holmstrom changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #10 from Garrett Holmstrom 2011-09-01
16:45:28 EDT ---
Looks good to me. Enjoy!
Review of pyrit-0.4.0-3.fc15:
Mandatory review guidelines:
ok - rpmlint output
pyrit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
pyrit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
pyrit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrit
--
The spelling-error warnings are bogus. Man pages are optional.
ok - Package meets naming guidelines
ok - Spec file name matches base package name
ok - License is acceptable (GPLv3+ with exceptions)
ok - License field in spec is correct
The file "pyrit" has no license header; assuming GPLv3+
ok - License files included in package %docs or not included in upstream source
ok - License files installed when any subpackage combination is installed
ok - Spec written in American English
ok - Spec is legible
ok - Sources match upstream unless altered to fix permissibility issues
Upstream MD5: 7258b6f3dacfb09736ddeed2a379df2d pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz
Your MD5: 7258b6f3dacfb09736ddeed2a379df2d pyrit-0.4.0.tar.gz
ok - Build succeeds on at least one supported platform
ok - Build succeeds on all supported platforms or has ExcludeArch + bugs filed
ok - BuildRequires correct
-- - Package handles locales with %find_lang
-- - %post, %postun call ldconfig if package contains shared .so files
ok - No bundled system libs
-- - Relocatability is justified
ok - Package owns all directories it creates
ok - Package requires other packages for directories it uses but does not own
ok - No duplicate files in %files unless necessary for license files
ok - File permissions are sane
ok - Each %files section contains %defattr on EL4
ok - Consistent use of macros
ok - Sources contain only permissible code or content
-- - Large documentation files go in -doc package
ok - Missing %doc files do not affect runtime
-- - Headers go in -devel package
-- - Static libs go in -static package
-- - Unversioned .so files go in -devel package
-- - Devel packages require base with fully-versioned dependency
ok - Package contains no .la files
-- - GUI app installs .desktop file w/desktop-file-install or has justification
ok - Package's files and directories don't conflict with others' or justified
ok - File names are valid UTF-8
Optional review guidelines:
ok - Query upstream about including license files
no - Translations of description, Summary
ok - Builds in mock
ok - Builds on all supported platforms
ok - Functions as described
-- - Scriptlets are sane
-- - Non-devel subpackage Requires are sane
-- - .pc files go in -devel unless main package is a development tool
ok - No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin
no - Man pages included for all executables
ok - Package with test-suite executes it in %check section
Packaging guidelines:
ok - Has dist tag
ok - Useful without external bits
ok - Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir, /usr/target, /run
-- - Programs launched before FS mounting use /run instead of /var/run
-- - Binaries in /bin, /sbin do not depend on files in /usr
ok - Changelog in prescribed format
ok - Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags
no - Correct BuildRoot tag on < F10/EL6
This prevents building for epel-5
no - Correct %clean section on < F13/EL6
This prevents building for epel-5
ok - Requires correct, justified where necessary
ok - Summary, description do not use trademarks incorrectly
ok - All relevant documentation is packaged, tagged appropriately
ok - Documentation files do not have executable permissions
ok - %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise
-- - Package with .pc files Requires pkgconfig on < EL6
ok - Useful -debuginfo package or disabled and justified
ok - No static executables
ok - Rpath absent or only used for internal libs
-- - Config files marked with %config
-- - %config files marked noreplace or justified
-- - No %config files under /usr
-- - SysV-style init script
ok - Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names where appropriate
ok - Spec uses macros for executables only when configurability is needed
-- - %makeinstall used only when ``make install DESTDIR=...'' doesn't work
ok - Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time
-- - Spec uses %{SOURCE#} instead of $RPM_SOURCE_DIR or %{sourcedir}
ok - %global instead of %define where appropriate
-- - Package containing translations BuildRequires gettext
-- - File timestamps preserved by file ops
-- - Parallel make
ok - Spec does not use Requires(pre,post) notation
-- - User, g
[Bug 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-09-06 10:45:52 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pyrit Short Description: A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker Owners: spot Branches: f14 f15 f16 InitialCC: -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla 2011-09-06 10:51:23 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). Garrett, in the future, please take ownership of review BZs. 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Garrett Holmstrom changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gho...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #13 from Garrett Holmstrom 2011-09-06 11:30:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > Garrett, in the future, please take ownership of review BZs. Thanks! Bah, looks like I forgot. Sorry about 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-06 16:15:50 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc15 -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-06 16:15:41 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc14 -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-06 16:16:00 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc16 -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-06 23:00:13 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-14 18:32:33 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-09-14 18:32:41 -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-15 21:58:32 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc15 |pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc14 -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc14 |pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc16 -- 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 691894] Review Request: pyrit - A GPGPU-driven WPA/WPA2-PSK key cracker
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=691894 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System 2011-09-30 14:31:36 EDT --- pyrit-0.4.0-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- 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
