Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948105
Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review?
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922460
--- Comment #5 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org ---
Thank you for review!
Then
* For should item
- It seems only this one?
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929256
Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=920436
Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903246
--- Comment #5 from Yaniv Bronhaim bronh...@gmail.com ---
set cpopen-createproess.so permissions to 755
Updated:
http://bronhaim.fedorapeople.org/python-cpopen.spec
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=928541
--- Comment #1 from Juan Orti Alcaine juan.o...@miceliux.com ---
Spec URL: http://jorti.fedorapeople.org/stem/python-stem.spec
SRPM URL: http://jorti.fedorapeople.org/stem/python-stem-1.0.1-2.fc18.src.rpm
I have updated the
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922460
Ricky Elrod rel...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922460
--- Comment #7 from Ricky Elrod rel...@redhat.com ---
This package is APPROVED.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948105
Ricky Elrod rel...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947453
--- Comment #1 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org ---
Upstream update:
Spec URL unchanged.
SRPM:
http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-ExtUtils-BuildRC/perl-ExtUtils-BuildRC-0.004-1.fc20.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
--- Comment #3 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org ---
(In reply to comment #2)
1. Please - separate spec sections other then expressions inside them - e.g.
with double CR. It's too hard to read spec now.
Well, even if
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
--- Comment #5 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org ---
IMHO, the spacing between sections is fine as is, it's definitely not a review
criterion. I'd remove the blank lines INSIDE the %prep, %install and %files
sections
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
--- Comment #6 from Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #5)
IMHO, the spacing between sections is fine as is, it's definitely not a
review criterion. I'd remove the blank lines INSIDE the %prep,
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
--- Comment #7 from Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com ---
Package Review
==
= MUST items =
[+]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[+]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968
Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922460
Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949214
Lokesh Mandvekar l...@buffalo.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949214
--- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com ---
Review comments:
- You might suggest what is needed to fix the build
- You should list the warning and comment on whether it is relevant or not. In
this case:
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929256
--- Comment #6 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org ---
Some notes:
* description
- Some part of description is redundant and better to fix
- free image viewer is just redundant. Fedora does not allow
non-free
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949214
Lokesh Mandvekar l...@buffalo.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
---
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=928226
Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949214
Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949302
Bug ID: 949302
Summary: Review Request:python-optcomplete - Shell Completion
Self-Generator for Python
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947492
Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879928
Bug 879928 depends on bug 805246, which changed state.
Bug 805246 Summary: please update mygui to new version 3.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=805246
What|Removed |Added
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929256
--- Comment #7 from Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #6)
* description
- Some part of description is redundant and better to fix
Fixed
* SourceURL:
- For sourceforge based tarball, please
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=928226
--- Comment #2 from David Tardon dtar...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #1)
I think the headers don't explicitly say GPLv2+ anywhere.
Anything LGPLv2+ is automatically GPLv2+, so I do not think this is a problem.
--
You
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949311
Bug ID: 949311
Summary: Review Request: python-workerpool - Multithreaded job
distribution module
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949317
Bug ID: 949317
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-serialport - Ruby library that
provide class for RS232 serail port
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929256
--- Comment #8 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org ---
%cmake sets the build type to Release by default, and unfortunately this
defaults to -O3 -DNDEBUG in CMake. Most packages override this to vastly
different defaults, but
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949317
Alejandro_Perez alejandro.perez.tor...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892335
--- Comment #27 from Sven Baus s.bau...@gmx.net ---
SPEC:
https://sourceforge.net/p/audiocuesheet/code/255/tree/trunk/RPM%20Build/SPECS/AudioCuesheetEditor.spec
RPM:
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949319
Bug ID: 949319
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-icaro - Ruby Api for Icaro
Robotic
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949319
Alejandro_Perez alejandro.perez.tor...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929256
--- Comment #9 from Eugene A. Pivnev ti.eug...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #8)
%cmake sets the build type to Release by default,
Sorry, but: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919044#c31
:-)
Anyway, to fix
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929256
--- Comment #10 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org ---
You're right, it doesn't, and IIRC this very issue is why it doesn't.
But that means the -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=release you're adding is the culprit, not
the %cmake macro.
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893866
--- Comment #22 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com ---
Some initial feedback:
Because it's only ARM and x86 the ExcludeArch should be:
ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 %{arm}
You also need to put as comments the exact
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893866
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
Bug ID: 949324
Summary: Review Request: oath-toolkit - One-time password
components
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893866
--- Comment #23 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com ---
Drop:
BuildRequires: glibc gcc
As per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRequires
Exceptions
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893866
--- Comment #24 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com ---
There's a few minor bits to be cleaned up but we're mostly there.
? rpmlint output:
The output below is mostly OK, there's a few things like spaces vs tabs need
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
--- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com ---
For PAM module to correctly work with sshd, we will probably need selinux label
(for oath users configuration/state file) and appropriate rules:
Apr 7 20:49:26 yarda
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
--- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com ---
Configuration and state is stored in one file, it's name is configurable
through PAM, in the example from comment 1, the /var/lib/users.oath was used.
--
You are
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=911229
--- Comment #5 from Jamie Nguyen jamieli...@fedoraproject.org ---
Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/mocha/nodejs-vows.spec
SRPM URL:
http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/mocha/SRPMS/nodejs-vows-0.7.0-4.fc18.src.rpm
* Sun
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893866
--- Comment #25 from Jon Disnard jdisn...@gmail.com ---
I have uploaded the required fixes.
SPEC FILE
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/41369/fedora/SPECS/vboot-utils.spec
SRPM
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
Bug ID: 949336
Summary: Review Request: rtl-sdr - SDR utilities for Realtek
RTL2832 based DVB-T dongles
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948000
Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947640
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947155
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947155
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
mingw-gstreamer1-1.0.6-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw-gstreamer1-1.0.6-1.fc19
--
You are
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893866
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #1)
- can you add a comment to the spec, saying patch was sent upstream ?
( just for tracking purpose, even if I guess it will be included
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947640
--- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org ---
And it doesn't build in mock on rawhide :
checking for x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu-pkg-config...
/usr/bin/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu-pkg-config
checking pkg-config is at least
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902024
--- Comment #17 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com ---
el6 doesn't have the necessary libraries to test easily.
But I can confirm that using this library breaks a working system.
When I was testing with this library
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
--- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Thanks for the review.
- License is wrong, since there is a bundle of getopt
- there is getopt in bundle
It seems to be used only on
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
--- Comment #5 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #2)
Thanks for the review.
- License is wrong, since there is a bundle of getopt
- there is getopt in bundle
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
--- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Wouldn't it be useful to pre-create a file with proper permission ( and so
selinux label ), have it owned by the rpm and document it ?
This
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894954
--- Comment #4 from Dan Callaghan dcall...@redhat.com ---
Thanks Sergio! Sorry for not replying sooner, the last few weeks have been very
busy.
(In reply to comment #2)
[!]: Uses parallel make.
which I don't know what it means.
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894954
Dan Callaghan dcall...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949336
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
--- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org ---
What about having a directory for holding the various files ?
This would keep the rules clean ( ie, everything in this directory would be
labelled as foo_t, and foot_t is
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=926062
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=926062
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
qpdfview-0.4.1-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=926062
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
qpdfview-0.4.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858064
Bug 858064 depends on bug 858068, which changed state.
Bug 858068 Summary: Review Request: mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend - Qt5 for Windows -
QtJsBackend component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858068
What
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858068
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858068
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
mingw-qt5-qtscript-5.0.1-1.fc18, mingw-qt5-qttools-5.0.1-1.fc18,
mingw-qt5-qtbase-5.0.1-4.fc18, mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend-5.0.1-1.fc18 has been
pushed to the
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858074
Bug 858074 depends on bug 858076, which changed state.
Bug 858076 Summary: Review Request: mingw-qt5-qtscript - Qt5 for Windows -
QtScript component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858076
What|Removed
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858076
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858076
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
mingw-qt5-qtscript-5.0.1-1.fc18, mingw-qt5-qttools-5.0.1-1.fc18,
mingw-qt5-qtbase-5.0.1-4.fc18, mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend-5.0.1-1.fc18 has been
pushed to the
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858080
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
mingw-qt5-qtscript-5.0.1-1.fc18, mingw-qt5-qttools-5.0.1-1.fc18,
mingw-qt5-qtbase-5.0.1-4.fc18, mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend-5.0.1-1.fc18 has been
pushed to the
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858080
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858082
Bug 858082 depends on bug 858080, which changed state.
Bug 858080 Summary: Review Request: mingw-qt5-qttools - Qt5 for Windows -
QtTools component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858080
What|Removed
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906481
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|RAWHIDE
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906481
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
erlang-cowboy-0.8.2-4.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949371
Bug ID: 949371
Summary: Review Request: StarCluster - Tool for managing
computing clusters hosted on Amazon's EC2
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949214
Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949371
Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949302
Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949311
Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888301
--- Comment #34 from Sebastien Jodogne s.jodo...@gmail.com ---
Dear Mario and Peter,
Thank you much for your help! The Orthanc package is now available in the
repositories:
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888301
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888301
--- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
orthanc-0.5.0-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/orthanc-0.5.0-1.fc18
--
You are receiving this
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888301
--- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
orthanc-0.5.0-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/orthanc-0.5.0-1.fc19
--
You are receiving this
90 matches
Mail list logo
