https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988667
Gergely Polonkai changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1325452
--- Comment #3 from Scott K Logan ---
Upstream added a LICENSE, and I updated the RPM to use GitHub instead of Pypi
for the content.
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327929
Mukundan Ragavan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319289
--- Comment #5 from Mukundan Ragavan ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #4)
> (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #3)
> > Package Review
> > ==
> >
> >
> > - If (and only if) the source
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1313828
--- Comment #5 from Raphael Groner ---
> open-nat.src:62: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib
That's a false positive.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono#gacutil_in_a_spec_file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307228
--- Comment #4 from Adrien Devresse ---
Hi Andrea,
little informal review :
- Please remove the Obsolete, they should be avoided for new packages if not
strictly required.
- BuildRequires: lfc-libs >= 1.8.8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1313828
--- Comment #4 from Antti Järvinen ---
All right,
I see that the "must" items previously mentioned are done so I'm almost ok with
this review. One new thing could be fixed still, namely the
open-nat.src:62: E:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287201
Christian Dersch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327528
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1316982
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307228
Adrien Devresse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327528
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264288
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
ghc-filemanip-0.3.6.3-1.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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264288
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304996
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304996
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
ghc-cmark-0.5.1-1.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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318969
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-B-Hooks-OP-Check-EntersubForCV-0.09-13.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora
23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324988
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
python-lasagne-0.1-3.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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221781
--- Comment #55 from Fedora Update System ---
zipios-2.1.1-1.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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324590
--- Comment #30 from Doug Ledford ---
Yes, the %{?dist} tag must be part of the release. What this highlights is the
fact that the release tag is Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS private. It is for the
distro to track their
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324590
--- Comment #29 from paul.j.re...@intel.com ---
(In reply to Michal Schmidt from comment #28)
> (In reply to paul.j.reger from comment #27)
> > To be clear, 10.1, is actually, currently in a pre-release state.
>
> I see. In that case Release
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328968
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l...@kernel.org
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328968
Bug ID: 1328968
Summary: Review Request: capnproto - A data interchange format
and capability-based RPC system
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328892
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Barnes ---
See also the CLI tool package review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328951
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328951
Bug ID: 1328951
Summary: Review Request: commissaire-client - CLI for
Commissaire
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264654
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
php-aws-sdk3-3.18.0-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-cd1cc9a342
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264654
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
php-aws-sdk3-3.18.0-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0973a7185f
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1264654
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040243
--- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa ---
Why don't we go ahead and go with the latter? I'll create a new review request
and CC you on it.
--
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=1324590
--- Comment #28 from Michal Schmidt ---
(In reply to paul.j.reger from comment #27)
> To be clear, 10.1, is actually, currently in a pre-release state.
I see. In that case Release value should be something like:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040243
Andy Lutomirski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(l...@kernel.org) |
--- Comment #7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326169
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326521
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System ---
php-akamai-open-edgegrid-client-0.4.4-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24
stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326521
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326169
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
php-league-climate-3.2.1-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327939
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
python-k8sclient-0.1.0-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324590
--- Comment #27 from paul.j.re...@intel.com ---
(In reply to Michal Schmidt from comment #26)
> > Release: 0
>
> From what you wrote in comment #19 I can now understand where this "0" comes
> from. However, for Fedora packaging, the initial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328248
Matt Bacchi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mbac...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(ho...@redhat.com) |
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(nhor...@redhat.co
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328892
Matthew Barnes changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: commissaire |Review Request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328892
Bug ID: 1328892
Summary: Review Request: commissaire - REST-based cluster admin
service
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328889
--- Comment #1 from Dave Love ---
I forgot to add, built under
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/loveshack/livhpc/build/172600/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324590
--- Comment #26 from Michal Schmidt ---
> Release: 0
From what you wrote in comment #19 I can now understand where this "0" comes
from. However, for Fedora packaging, the initial value for Release should be
"1". A
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328889
Bug ID: 1328889
Summary: Review Request: libiomp - Intel OpenMP runtime library
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Priority:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327078
--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Škarvada ---
New version:
Spec URL:
https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/python-pyrtlsdr/python-pyrtlsdr.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040243
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l...@kernel.org,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328868
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1268242
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1323832
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1135103 (plasma5)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328062
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327888
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1325690
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327890
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327892
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328868
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1325672
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328868
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1325672, 1325671,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1325671
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1328868
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328868
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||Tracking
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328868
Bug ID: 1328868
Summary: Review Request: presto - Distributed SQL query engine
for big data
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327078
--- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Škarvada ---
(In reply to Jan Synacek from comment #1)
Thanks for the review.
> From rpmlint:
>
> ...
> python2-pyrtlsdr.noarch: E: non-executable-script
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327078
--- Comment #1 from Jan Synacek ---
From rpmlint:
...
python2-pyrtlsdr.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/rtlsdr/rtlsdrtcp.py 644 /usr/bin/python2
...
python3-pyrtlsdr.noarch: E:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1323186
Honggang LI changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
Honggang LI changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
--- Comment #8 from Honggang LI ---
Spec URL:
http://people.redhat.com/honli/.b3bbdef3ae55a2527d90257c7efa4ed6/infinipath-psm.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324590
--- Comment #25 from Michal Schmidt ---
(In reply to paul.j.reger from comment #19)
> Yes, we are trying to use one 'template' spec file to support multiple
> distributions.
It's fine if you want to use that for your
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
--- Comment #7 from Honggang LI ---
> infinipath-psm-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
This is an upstream issue, as no document available in the git repo.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
--- Comment #6 from Honggang LI ---
(In reply to Neil Horman from comment #2)
> Rpmlint
> ---
> Checking: infinipath-psm-3.3-22_g4abbc60_open.1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
--- Comment #5 from Honggang LI ---
# diff -up infinipath-psm.spec.old infinipath-psm.spec
--- infinipath-psm.spec.old 2016-04-19 05:36:53.0 -0400
+++ infinipath-psm.spec 2016-04-20 05:57:31.648800734 -0400
@@
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
Honggang LI changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(ho...@redhat.com) |
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327497
--- Comment #11 from Matthias Runge ---
(In reply to Jan Chaloupka from comment #10)
> Yeah, this is gopkg.in speciality. There are various ways how to write the
> prefix:
> - gopkg.in/ini.v1
> - gopkg.in/v1/ini
>
> I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327497
--- Comment #10 from Jan Chaloupka ---
Yeah, this is gopkg.in speciality. There are various ways how to write the
prefix:
- gopkg.in/ini.v1
- gopkg.in/v1/ini
I usually extend the spec file once they are needed. Will
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297550
Matthias Runge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327497
--- Comment #9 from Matthias Runge ---
Ugh, something I found out after approving this package:
you need to link files from /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/go-ini/ini/ to
/usr/share/gocode/src/gopkg.in/ini.v1 or make them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327497
Matthias Runge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1297679
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297549
Matthias Runge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297550
Matthias Runge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mru...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328739
Matthias Runge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328739
Bug ID: 1328739
Summary: Review Request: golang-github-jmespath-go-jmespath -
URL-friendly slugify with multiple languages support
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326217
Parag AN(पराग) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328390
--- Comment #3 from Honggang LI ---
(In reply to Neil Horman from comment #2)
> [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
>
83 matches
Mail list logo