Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896744
Eduardo Echeverria changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888385
Yohan Graterol changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yohangratero...@gmail.co
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867368
--- Comment #10 from František Dvořák ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: canl-c
Short Description: Common Authentication Library for C
Owners: valtri
Branches: f18 el6
InitialCC:
--
You are receivi
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
Ryan Rix changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You are recei
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
Ryan Rix changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #4 from Ryan
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823873
Michael Cronenworth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449 (FE-DEADREVI
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
Ian Weller changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901387
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Bridon ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> TODO: You can replace %{__perl} macro with plain perl command.
Fixed.
> TODO: Replace PERL_INSTALL_ROOT variable with DESTDIR in %install section.
> Current ExtUt
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895480
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Bridon ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> TODO: You can replace %{__perl} macros with plain perl command.
Fixed.
> $ rpm -q --requires -p
> ../RPMS/noarch/perl-ClamAV-Client-0.11-1.fc19.noarch.rpm | sort
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896744
Eduardo Echeverria changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832074
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
python-tahrir-api-0.1.7-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
You are receiving this
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886230
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
php-phpass-0.3-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
ht
Product: Fedora EPEL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=881903
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System ---
python-zope-interface4-4.0.2-7.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
You are rece
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886261
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
php-when-0.3-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
http
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889351
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
czmq-1.3.2-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https:
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823340
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
rubygem-ipaddress-0.8.0-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable
repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from thi
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843997
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System ---
mlpack-1.0.3-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
http
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843997
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Re
Product: Fedora EPEL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884855
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System ---
python-webtest1.3-1.3.4-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable
repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
Ryan Rix changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #2 from Ryan
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
--- Comment #1 from Ian Weller ---
___
/ The package builds and runs properly, \
| as shown here. I will do a full |
| checklist in a bit. |
|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
Ian Weller changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902582
Bug ID: 902582
Summary: Review Request: cowsay-beefymiracle
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity: unspecified
Priority: unspec
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=891191
--- Comment #5 from T.C. Hollingsworth ---
The license is BSD:
https://github.com/isaacs/fstream-ignore/commit/f5b9b1d981ff98ce1c92d4eac2b1aa91a142e421
License tag fixed:
Spec: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/npm/nodejs-fstream-i
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901742
--- Comment #4 from Shawn Iwinski ---
- Updated to upstream version 0.4.0
- Fixed license
- Fixed build requires
SPEC URL: http://siwinski.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/SPECS/php-Raven.spec
SRPM URL:
http://siwinski.fedorapeople.or
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
--- Comment #12 from Jaroslav Škarvada ---
I would probably add -f to both ln and rm and ghost the symlinks created in
post. I would also make the guile-2 license field same as in compat-guile.
--
You are receiving this mail bec
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890839
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard| NotReady |
--- Comment #4 from Miro
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894482
--- Comment #4 from Michael Scherer ---
I mean writing
BuildRequires: %scl-build
instead of
BuildRequires: ruby193-build
( maybe I am taking DRY principle too seriously )
For the plugin and missing directory, why not place
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896744
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Price ---
OK 1.0 has been released :) I've updated the package and added your changes to
the spec file. It's rpmlint clean now that the incorrect-fsf-address has been
fixed upstream.
Spec: http://andyp.
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894482
--- Comment #3 from Troy Dawson ---
Spec URL:
http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/openshift-origin/rubygem-openshift-origin-auth-kerberos.spec
SRPM URL:
http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/openshift-origin/rubygem-openshift-origin-auth-ke
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
--- Comment #39 from Tobias Florek ---
(i really like repo-font-audit's use of unicode)
the following is a commented copy of every warning that repo-font-audit
reports.
— Warning: bad font naming
Source Code Pro, Semibold →
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
--- Comment #38 from Tobias Florek ---
i'll look into repo-font-audit later.
for now: a diff between the other bug's adobe-source-sans-pro-fonts.spec and my
adobe-source-code-pro.spec does not yield many functional differences, d
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902025
--- Comment #14 from Pavel Raiskup ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: pybugz
Short Description: Command line interface for Bugzilla written in Python
Owners: praiskup
Branches: f17 f18 el6
InitialCC
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890839
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard|| NotReady
--
You are rec
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895073
--- Comment #4 from Michael Scherer ---
I guess then this is in fesco hand.
Did they tried to push upstream the code for libevent ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from t
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
--- Comment #37 from Michael Schwendt ---
The https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle page suggests that
the reviewer/sponsor has "good knowledge of font packaging policies". It also
mentions the "repo-font-audit" to
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890839
--- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok ---
I'm having serious issues with 0.9.8, so for now, please use:
https://github.com/downloads/hroncok/SPECS/slic3r-0.9.7-3.fc18.src.rpm
Also, there are warnings (both in 0.9.7 and 0.9.8):
Runni
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902503
Bug ID: 902503
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-httpclient - HTTP Client
interface for ruby
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=881096
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
openstack-packstack-2012.2.2-0.5.dev318.fc18 has been submitted as an update
for Fedora 18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openstack-packstack-2012.2.2-0.5.dev318.fc18
--
Yo
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902025
--- Comment #13 from Scott Tsai ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Pavel,
Besides setting the "fedroa-cvs" flag to "?", you should also fill out a copy
the "New Package SCM Request" template from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828849
--- Comment #6 from Anderson Silva ---
updated:
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~ansilva/drupal6-faq.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~ansilva/drupal6-faq-1.13-5.fc17.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902025
Scott Tsai changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889546
Stanislav Ochotnicky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889546
--- Comment #3 from Stanislav Ochotnicky ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked when
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901387
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902025
Pavel Raiskup changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review+ |
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901872
Michael J Gruber changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@fedoraproject.org
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
--- Comment #36 from Tobias Florek ---
basically i need a sponser.
but in detail. missing is:
- Inform Upstream (for this font)
- introduce yourself
- Get Sponsored
and the following steps.
i might get to write the two mails to
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
--- Comment #11 from Jaroslav Škarvada ---
The only problem I can see now (with the specs from the comment 10 and
rawhide):
# yum install guile guile-devel guile.i686 guile-devel.i686
# yum install ./guile-2.0.6-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902006
--- Comment #1 from Michael J Gruber ---
Taking this.
A few things I've spotted before the full formal review:
pylibpcap.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/_pcapmodule.so 0775L
This shoul
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mschwe...@gmail.com
-
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901387
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
--- Comment #34 from Tobias Florek ---
thanks for noticing. ironically that was a leftover from cleanup that %clean
ended up empty.
new uploads:
http://www.math.hu-berlin.de/~florek/adobe-source-code-pro-fonts.spec
http://www.m
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895480
--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ---
URL and Source0 are usable. Ok.
Source file is original (SHA-256:
2cf05681145d745269d6712c5ad424a10f381494123f568884d958d257e75246). Ok.
Summary verified from README. Ok.
Description verified fro
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867368
František Dvořák changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comme
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
--- Comment #33 from Michael Schwendt ---
> %clean
> %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.otf
Suspicious and misleading.
The %clean here ought to be deleted, because the line below it has nothing to
do with it. The %_font_pkg is a macro
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338
--- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt ---
Filling in the many '[ ]' fields in the report would be interesting as there
some issues are waiting to be discovered.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
--
You ar
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895480
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902006
Michael J Gruber changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@fedoraproject.org
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848144
--- Comment #11 from Paulo Andrade
---
Note that only a SDL2 package would not be enough.
I did some experiments with SDL_ttf built on top
of SDL2. Needs a lot of patching, and the "trivial"
patch would just create a SDL_ttf that
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901742
--- Comment #3 from Shawn Iwinski ---
(In reply to comment #2)
License issue: Sorry I missed that! I have an issue open with upstream for
this: https://github.com/getsentry/raven-php/issues/67
BuildRequires issues: Wow... no id
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338
--- Comment #15 from Ramon de C Valle ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Header files in -devel
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868531
Jose Pedro Oliveira changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Co
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894926
Michael J Gruber changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@fedoraproject.org
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868531
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338
--- Comment #14 from Ramon de C Valle ---
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~rdecarva/libdistorm3/libdistorm3.spec
SRPM URL:
http://people.redhat.com/~rdecarva/libdistorm3/libdistorm3-3.3-1.fc18.src.rpm
Description:
A lightweigh
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338
Ramon de C Valle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: libdistorm |Review Request: libdis
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890491
--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ---
URL and Source0 are usable. Ok.
Source file is original (SHA-256:
09ff5367e83a752f1279f31d8ac05b62360222bb438dc58a71f7e39506298c70). Ok.
Summary verified from lib/Mail/Procmail.pm. Ok.
Descriptio
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868531
--- Comment #6 from Jose Pedro Oliveira ---
New SRPM (and specfile) with the perl(threads) BR:
http://um-pe09-2.di.uminho.pt/fedora/perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3-1.08-2.fc17.src.rpm
http://um-pe09-2.di.uminho.pt/fedora/perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3.spec
r
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=896193
--- Comment #4 from Wesley Hearn ---
Uodated again
http://jknife.fedorapeople.org/review/plank-0.2.0.731-1.20130121.fc18.src.rpm
http://jknife.fedorapeople.org/review/plank.spec
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890491
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868531
--- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ---
URL and Source0 are usable. Ok.
Source file is original (SHA-256:
c336f5430b02714f70e374fb7dd45a44e13bd873f74761391b9ac7324a10814a). Ok.
Summary verified from lib/ZMQ/LibZMQ3.pm. Ok.
Description
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
--- Comment #10 from Jaroslav Škarvada ---
I had to do some changes to fix the upgrade path:
http://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/guile/compat-guile18.spec
http://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/guile/guile.spec
I am not sure about the %
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868531
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876928
--- Comment #9 from Miro Hrončok ---
Michal, are you still interested in this?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=T6ESLM
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901594
--- Comment #5 from Remi Collet ---
AS this packages requires php version 5.3.7, you could not target EPEL.
So, it will be cleaner to use, instead of php-common:
Requires: php(language) >= 5.3.7
--
You are receiving this
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901742
--- Comment #2 from Remi Collet ---
Created attachment 684298
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=684298&action=edit
php-Raven-review.txt
Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16
Buildroo
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901742
Remi Collet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com
-
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884706
--- Comment #2 from Jan Safranek ---
Thanks for the review!
(In reply to comment #1)
> [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
> The package contains classes from the package
> org.stathissideris.ascii2image. This p
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902024
--- Comment #5 from Mamoru TASAKA ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > > - RLE compression
> > Spec mentions: 0 = Raw Data, 1 = RLE compressed, 2 = ZIP without prediction,
> > 3 = ZIP with prediction
> gimp does not support 2 and 3,
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902024
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru TASAKA ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The primary reason why I've searched a bit about this is that PSD is (or
> used to be?) a proprietary and undocumented file format. ..
Fedora already has PSD suppo
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901611
--- Comment #4 from Remi Collet ---
I miss this important one
[!]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
As this is not a library, "atoum" is the correct name.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901611
Remi Collet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901611
Remi Collet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com
-
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901611
--- Comment #2 from Remi Collet ---
Created attachment 684276
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=684276&action=edit
php-atoum-review.txt
Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16
Buildroo
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901617
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #3
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902024
--- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt ---
The primary reason why I've searched a bit about this is that PSD is (or used
to be?) a proprietary and undocumented file format. I wanted to learn how much
of this is "open", legal and not
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895573
Michal Srb changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #42 from RudraB ---
An updated spec and srpm is uploaded at
http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl-1.0-11.fc18.src.rpm
http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl.spec
%changelog
* Mon Jan 21 2013 Rudra Banerjee - 1.0-11
-
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901617
Petr Šabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901594
Remi Collet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901594
Remi Collet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #684251||review?
Flags
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901594
--- Comment #2 from Remi Collet ---
Created attachment 684250
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=684250&action=edit
phpci.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscri
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901617
Petr Šabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
C
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867368
Mattias Ellert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895616
Michal Srb changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895073
--- Comment #3 from Marcel Wysocki ---
Answer from Upstream:
The bundled libraries are modified versions, with extra features that are
required for dnscrypt-proxy.
Namely, support for TXT records has been added to lib event, as
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895479
--- Comment #11 from Andreas Schneider ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: cmocka
Short Description: Lightweight library to simplify and generalize unit tests
for C
Owners: asn
Branches: f18 rawhide
I
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=891229
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(mario.blaetterman |
|n...@
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895479
Andreas Schneider changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
