https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790
--- Comment #8 from Christopher Meng ---
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #6)
> Well, it seems that you've to be creative in finding another alternative
> package name. Some other example that could lead to confusion now:
> http://mdp-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790
--- Comment #7 from Raphael Groner ---
http://www.abbreviations.com/MDP
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790
--- Comment #6 from Raphael Groner ---
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #5)
> I don't have chance to package this now:
>
> https://github.com/visit1985/mdp
Well, it seems that you've to be creative in finding another alternative
pa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i...@cicku.me
--- Comment #5 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
--- Comment #6 from Christopher Meng ---
Well, reviewers should review all packages under rawhide chroot.
Unfortunately SpeexDSP is ONLY available on f22+.
My fedora-review experience, is that using fedora-review -rvn /path/to/SRPM,
and my s
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186558
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|gfm-1.07-3.fc21 |gfm-1.07-3.fc22
--- Comment #1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243379
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|tinyxpath-1.3.1-3.fc22 |tinyxpath-1.3.1-3.fc21
--- Com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249271
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||nodejs-unzip-response-1.0.0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249272
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||nodejs-node-status-codes-1.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244508
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|python-sphinx-theme-alabast |python-sphinx-theme-alabast
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249146
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||nodejs-capture-stack-trace-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1241919
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|python-line_profiler-1.0-6. |python-line_profiler-1.0-6.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249350
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|python3-pytest-asyncio-0.1. |python3-pytest-asyncio-0.1.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927883
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System ---
python-defusedxml-0.4.1-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Yo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246891
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186558
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243379
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|tinyxpath-1.3.1-3.fc23 |tinyxpath-1.3.1-3.fc22
--- Com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193990
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246598
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|python-hypothesis-1.10.0-1. |python-hypothesis-1.10.0-1.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249094
Bug 1249094 depends on bug 1150445, which changed state.
Bug 1150445 Summary: Review Request: Random123 - Library of random number
generators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150445
What|Removed |A
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150445
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246891
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
xkb-switch-1.3.1-1.20150719git532d923.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22
stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Meng ---
(In reply to Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos from comment #3)
> In addition to the comment above, you use OPTCFLAGS='%{optflags}', but I
> don't see OPTCFLAGS being read by the makefile. Why not use
> CFLAGS="$
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251500
Kevin Kofler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org
--- Comment #11
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1213111
Michael Hampton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1253859
Referenced Bugs:
https://
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656938
--- Comment #6 from Volker Fröhlich ---
That's correct!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
pa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
David Tardon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dtar...@redhat.com
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247328
--- Comment #7 from Pranav Kant ---
https://pranvk.fedorapeople.org/packages/sshrc.spec
https://pranvk.fedorapeople.org/packages/sshrc-0.5-3.fc22.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are alw
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234905
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|NOTABUG |DEFERRED
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234905
--- Comment #12 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
I don't have any particular interest in this package. Having python2 and
python3 subpackages is not (one can at least assume that without further
information) harder than in any other python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247328
--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
If an options is given on the command line, e.g. "-z", it has special meaning
for [.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified abou
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820660
Bug 820660 depends on bug 693137, which changed state.
Bug 693137 Summary: Review Request: python-ffc - A compiler for finite element
variational forms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693137
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821727
Bug 821727 depends on bug 693137, which changed state.
Bug 693137 Summary: Review Request: python-ffc - A compiler for finite element
variational forms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693137
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693137
Jonathan Underwood changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234905
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656938
John C Peterson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j...@eskimo.com
Flags|fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228503
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.r
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228503
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #3 from gil ca
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150566
--- Comment #13 from William Moreno ---
Package Review
==
Need Work:
==
Fail: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Fail: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Orphan dir: /usr/share/i
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
--- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group)
---
Also look in fedora-review's build.log in parent dir:
INFO: mock.py version 1.2.10 starting (python version = 2.7.8)...
[...]
ERROR: Command failed:
# /usr/bin/yum-b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234905
--- Comment #10 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #9)
> (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #6)
> > Support for both python versions *should* be provided if possible. Many
> > peopl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228503
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243530
Jonathan Underwood changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You are receivin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234905
--- Comment #9 from Raphael Groner ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #6)
> Support for both python versions *should* be provided if possible. Many
> people are still using py2...
Support for python2 (cause of legacy an
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--
You are receiving thi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251500
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Alias||kwsys
--
You are receiving this mail be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251500
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1251198
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251500
--- Comment #10 from Rex Dieter ---
Further, I didn't read any mention of "must be shared library" in any FPC
decisions on this topic. Did I miss something?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251500
--- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter ---
"I also believe that packaging a static library would violate the FPC decision
to unbundle"
you believe wrong, but feel free to ask fpc for clarification if you believe
otherwise.
See also bug #1251198 , wh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
--- Comment #4 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos ---
Nothing helpful unfortunately.
Mock Version: 1.2.12
ENTER do(['bash', '--login', '-c', '/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bs --target x86_64
--nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/libebur128.spec'],
chrootPath='/var/l
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246846
--- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo ---
Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/jmh.spec
SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/jmh-1.10.3-1.fc22.src.rpm
- update to 1.10.3
Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10703274
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
--- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group)
---
What are the contents of the build.log?
ERROR: 'mock build failed, see
/home/nmavrogi/review/1251940-libebur128/results/build.log'
--
You are receiving this mail bec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Chris
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208381
--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo ---
Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/gmavenplus-plugin.spec
SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/gmavenplus-plugin-1.5-1.fc22.src.rpm
Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10703
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790
--- Comment #4 from Raphael Groner ---
Task info (0.7.4-2):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10703194
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246790
--- Comment #3 from Raphael Groner ---
Spec URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/gpg/mdp/mdp.spec
SRPM URL:
https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/gpg/mdp/mdp-0.7.4-2.fc22.src.rpm
* Fri Aug 14 2015 Raphael Groner <> - 0.7.4-2
- menti
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
--- Comment #1 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos ---
There seems to be something wrong with the .src.rpm. I get the errors below by
fedora-review, although if I make my own src.rpm it works file.
INFO: Using review directory: /home/nmavrogi/review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
--- Comment #3 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos ---
In addition to the comment above, you use OPTCFLAGS='%{optflags}', but I don't
see OPTCFLAGS being read by the makefile. Why not use
CFLAGS="${CFLAGS:-%optflags}" ; export CFLAGS ; make? The same
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
--- Comment #2 from David Tardon ---
The examples/disassemble_gif.pl script must be installed as non-excecutable.
Otherwise it pulls in perl.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250025
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--
You are receiving thi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1161483
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1229349
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243530
--- Comment #37 from Jonathan Underwood ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: winswitch
Short Description: Utility for controlling remote desktop sessions
Upstream URL: http://winswitch.org/
Owners: jgu cicku
Branch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos changed:
What|Removed |Added
Docs Contact|nmavr...@redhat.com |
Assignee|nob...@fe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250025
--- Comment #1 from Honza Horak ---
Package Review
==
I've spotted those issues, that should be fixed:
- soname is librocksdb.so.3.12, is this desired? I'd expect just
librocksdb.so.3, but maybe upstream decided differently. It m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251940
Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nmavr...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nmavr...@redhat.com
Doc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243530
--- Comment #36 from Jonathan Underwood ---
Thanks very much for the great review, you really helped iron out a number of
issues, it's great to see such a careful and thorough review.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243530
--- Comment #35 from Jonathan Underwood ---
Spec URL: https://jgu.fedorapeople.org/winswitch.spec
SRPM URL: https://jgu.fedorapeople.org/winswitch-0.12.21-17.fc22.src.rpm
* Fri Aug 14 2015 Jonathan Underwood -
0.12.21-17
- Own /usr/share/na
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1253244
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337
--- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng ---
Spec URL: http://cicku.me/libnsgif.spec
SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/libnsgif-0.1.2-1.fc24.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified abou
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1252530
Rafael Fonseca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #5 from Rafa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1162234
--- Comment #23 from Giuseppe Paterno' ---
Need a sponsor to push it in fedora please :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1162234
--- Comment #22 from Giuseppe Paterno' ---
Updated package, as it now includes PAM support as well.
SPEC: https://gpaterno.fedorapeople.org/nss-securepass.spec
SRPM: https://gpaterno.fedorapeople.org/nss-securepass-0.3-1.el6.src.rpm
--
You a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128336
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
libnsbmp-0.1.2-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libnsbmp-0.1.2-1.fc22
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list fo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128336
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System ---
libnsbmp-0.1.2-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libnsbmp-0.1.2-1.fc21
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list fo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128336
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
libnsbmp-0.1.2-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 23.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libnsbmp-0.1.2-1.fc23
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list fo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128336
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251500
--- Comment #8 from Mattias Ellert ---
In my opinion, creating a package containing a static library would be the sum
of two evils. You get all the work of maintaining a new package but still each
package using the library get one (or more) bu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251831
Mamoru TASAKA changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251833
Mamoru TASAKA changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
81 matches
Mail list logo