https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389971
--- Comment #20 from Ryan H. Lewis (rhl) ---
1) Are PPC64 builds a necessity?
Perhaps we can just file a bug for this and fix it later? Initial investigation
suggests its likely a toolchain issue. We need to run valgrind on it simulating
the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397089
--- Comment #5 from Fl@sh ---
ok, dropped from summary and added to description.
Spec URL: https://f1ash.fedorapeople.org/DNSCryptClient/DNSCryptClient.spec
SRPM URL:
https://f1ash.fedorapeople.org/DNSCryptClient/DNSCryptClient-1.0.0-2.fc26.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383416
--- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok ---
Once Iryna unofficially approves the package, I will review it and approve it
myself to speed things up, don't worry.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are al
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383416
--- Comment #5 from Parag AN(पराग) ---
Thanks Miro for your reply.
--
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=1370735
Martin Bříza changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ needinfo+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804
--- Comment #4 from Iryna Shcherbina ---
Hi Fabian,
Another thing is that batinfo contains tests, they are just
not included into the tarball:
https://github.com/nicolargo/batinfo/blob/master/test_batinfo.py
You should either get the tests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370792
Martin Bříza changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Mar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397317
Bug ID: 1397317
Summary: Review Request: graphene - A thin layer of types for
graphic libraries
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397317
Igor Gnatenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397317
--- Comment #1 from Igor Gnatenko ---
This packaging has some issues, please take proper one from
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/ignatenkobrain/public_git/graphene.git/plain/graphene.spec.
in short, libexecdir should be used for tests. Multipl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389971
--- Comment #21 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Ryan H. Lewis (rhl) from comment #20)
> 1) Are PPC64 builds a necessity?
>
> Perhaps we can just file a bug for this and fix it later? Initial
> investigation suggests its likely a toolcha
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397317
--- Comment #2 from Kalev Lember ---
Thanks for looking at this, Igor. Can you elaborate on the multiple unowned
directories? I can't see any.
* Tue Nov 22 2016 Kalev Lember - 1.5.1-0.2.git8a7a4a3
- Install installed tests to libexecdir (#13
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397317
Igor Gnatenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375670
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System ---
python26-2.6.9-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-54c504f247
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397140
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from A
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #7 from Radovan Sroka ---
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/librdkafka/raw/master/f/librdkafka.spec
SRPM URL:
https://pagure.io/librdkafka/raw/master/f/librdkafka-0.9.2-6.fc24.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #8 from Igor Gnatenko ---
* Missing BuildRequires for compiler (gcc, gcc-c++)
* make %{?_smp_mflags} -> %make_build
* %clean section should not be used
* don't use 0644 permissions on shared objects
* %dir %{_includedir}/librdkafka
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #9 from Radovan Sroka ---
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/librdkafka/raw/master/f/librdkafka.spec
SRPM URL:
https://pagure.io/librdkafka/raw/master/f/librdkafka-0.9.2-8.fc24.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelen ---
Igor, thanks for amendment.
The compilers (gcc, gcc-c++) are not needed according to Fedora review tool,
but I can't find the actual paragraph in the Guidelines. Can you point to this
one? If so, we should
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #11 from Radovan Sroka ---
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/librdkafka/raw/master/f/librdkafka.spec
SRPM URL:
https://pagure.io/librdkafka/raw/master/f/librdkafka-0.9.2-9.fc24.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397051
--- Comment #7 from Tomas Repik ---
Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v0/caffeine.spec
SRPM URL:
https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v0/caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24.src.rpm
- added maven-plugin-bundle
- changed Source0
- versio
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397051
--- Comment #8 from Tomas Repik ---
Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine.spec
SRPM URL:
https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24.src.rpm
- added maven-plugin-bundle
- changed Source0
- versio
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
Jakub Jelen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #12 from Jak
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397051
--- Comment #9 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Tomas Repik from comment #8)
> Spec URL: https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://trepik.fedorapeople.org/caffeine/v1/caffeine-2.3.5-1.fc24.src.rpm
>
> -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1390595
Radovan Sroka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsr...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804
--- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter ---
(In reply to Iryna Shcherbina from comment #3)
> The spec file looks good to me, but I would suggest to do another small
> change.
> The %description is missing one sentence comparing to the one in packa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804
--- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter ---
i meant: No Py3 on EPEL.
--
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=1397051
--- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo ---
Created attachment 1222731
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1222731&action=edit
spec file
i done some changes in Your spec files, i had wrote as early, guava extension
sub module is not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395354
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
python-colorlog-2.7.0-2.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-e496b469bb
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395354
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #13 from Igor Gnatenko ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelen from comment #10)
> Igor, thanks for amendment.
>
> The compilers (gcc, gcc-c++) are not needed according to Fedora review tool,
> but I can't find the actual paragraph in the Gu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelen ---
Thanks for the explanation. I though there was something like this, but I was
unable to find it. So it is certainly bug in fedora-review, which would be good
to resolve. For the reference, there is already
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395354
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
python-colorlog-2.7.0-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-36675307ed
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396922
Fabian Affolter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1391287
--- Comment #2 from Fabian
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396923
Fabian Affolter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397030
--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mingw-libidn2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155793
--- Comment #31 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/hyperrogue
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about ch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394275
--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/librdkafka
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about ch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394952
--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-avocado
--
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=1397261
Tom "spot" Callaway changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tcall...@redhat.com
--- Comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1390595
--- Comment #3 from Piotr Popieluch ---
(In reply to Radovan Sroka from comment #2)
> There is another finished review for this package: 1394275, so this review
> can be closed. I add that reviewed package into the fedora repository, but
> not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1353169
José Matos changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(jama...@fc.up.pt) |
--- Comment #18 from José Matos ---
I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397030
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397030
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
mingw-libidn2-0.11-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-bfdd1401b0
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC lis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397030
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
mingw-libidn2-0.11-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-aa90590a28
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC lis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395396
--- Comment #4 from Athos Ribeiro ---
The SRPM URL points to release 1, but the SPEC file uses release 3, could you
provide the link for 0.1.5-3?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always noti
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382850
Brandon Nielsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||niels...@jetfuse.net
--- Comment #1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389985
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1397307
Referenced Bugs:
https://bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804
--- Comment #7 from Iryna Shcherbina ---
Hi Fabian,
Thank you for creating the issue and for your responses.
Please make sure to add the %check section with the next release when the issue
is resolved.
Also the spec file [0] does not reflec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395554
--- Comment #8 from Athos Ribeiro ---
Hi Fabian,
Package looks great now!
There are 2 issues left before we can have this approved:
1 - Python2 package has no license (you only included it in the python3
package).
2 - The %{sum} macro was
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395396
--- Comment #5 from Orion Poplawski ---
Shouldn't be too hard to figure out :)
SRPM URL:
https://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-sphinx-gallery-0.1.5-3.fc26.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397140
--- Comment #2 from Jeremy Newton ---
Thanks!
--
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
___
pac
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397140
--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mrrescue
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about chang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389404
--- Comment #3 from Athos Ribeiro ---
Hi David,
Naming:
- All the Flask related packages are named with lower case. Did you consider
that when naming this package?
License:
- The license file you are using belongs to the "Flask Sphinx Styl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387927
Brandon Nielsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||niels...@jetfuse.net
--- Comment #2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388396
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
--- Comment #10 from Miro Hrončok --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383416
--- Comment #6 from Iryna Shcherbina ---
Hi Parag,
thank you for your concern, I should not have assigned it to myself.
However, I have been sponsored and now I can approve packages and continue with
the review.
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395955
--- Comment #7 from Neal Gompa ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395955
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Neal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370621
Iryna Shcherbina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395804
Iryna Shcherbina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ishch...@redhat.com
Fla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370621
--- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko ---
(In reply to Iryna Shcherbina from comment #2)
> I have been sponsored and now I can continue with the formal review.
I will update & fix the stuff in upcoming days.
--
You are receiving this mail becaus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372836
Iryna Shcherbina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1351115
Iryna Shcherbina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378095
Brandon Nielsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||niels...@jetfuse.net
--- Comment #1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350884
--- Comment #6 from Brandon Nielsen ---
Did a few informal reviews:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387927
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378095
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382850
--
You are recei
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261
--- Comment #3 from Yaakov Selkowitz ---
Spec URL: https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free.spec
SRPM URL:
https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.10.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
Description: GStreamer st
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395396
Athos Ribeiro changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from At
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388945
--- Comment #6 from MartinKG ---
because it easier to update (spectool -g
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388396
--- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-pynlpl
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395396
--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-sphinx_gallery
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395396
Orion Poplawski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
|py
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155793
--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System ---
hyperrogue-8.3-2.j.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-beb538eef6
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155793
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309909
Raphael Groner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350029
tatyana changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(tatyana.e.nikolov |
|a...@intel.com)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1390595
--- Comment #4 from Derek Ditch ---
Radovan, thanks for the update. That review was submitted after I submitted
this one. I do need this package in EPEL if possible until it is included
upstream. There are other packages that I'd like to submi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309909
--- Comment #18 from Orion Poplawski ---
Shifted to github source to get the LICENSE file. sphinx-build fails (too old
I think), so waiting for sphinx-build-3.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309909
--- Comment #19 from Orion Poplawski ---
Oh, and thanks for the review!
--
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=1350029
--- Comment #30 from Igor Gnatenko ---
(In reply to tatyana from comment #29)
> I thought that this package has been released and no further action was
> required. I don't know who needs to update the bug status.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376940
--- Comment #4 from Orion Poplawski ---
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-urllib3.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python3-urllib3-1.19.1-1.el7.src.rpm
* Tue Nov 22 2016 Orion Poplawski - 1.19.1-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350029
--- Comment #31 from tatyana ---
Thank you for the information.
Just to clarify this package was released as part of RedHat 7.3. There is
another libi40iw bug report (id=1381746) which targets RehHat 7.4. We are still
working on preparing pat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397089
--- Comment #6 from Fl@sh ---
INFO for reviewer or testers: after application using need RESTORE system
resolver settings. Click 'Restore' (third) button for it or restore resolv.conf
manually.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374898
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #13 from Fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ngomp...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139
--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa ---
@Yaakov, I do not see how that fixes the fact that the source code is missing
in the debuginfo subpackage...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notifi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388396
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
python-pynlpl-1.0.9-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-c75647fa6a
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC l
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388396
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395396
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-sphinx-gallery
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309909
--- Comment #20 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python3-tornado
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified abo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1346407
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #21 from Fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375670
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |ON_QA
Resolution|CURRENT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139
--- Comment #10 from Yaakov Selkowitz ---
The sources are missing in the debug package because configure is messing
around with CFLAGS. However, given Fedora's default %{optflags}, you are
correct that this isn't quite sufficient; --disable-d
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309909
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387873
--- Comment #7 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
%{!?python2_sitearch: %define python_sitearch %(%{__python2} -c "from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib(1)")}
→ harmless, but unnecessary
Group: Applic
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309909
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System ---
python3-tornado-4.4.2-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-27782b5577
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396790
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||and...@tosk.in,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397620
Bug ID: 1397620
Summary: Review Request: nodejs-int64-buffer - 64bit Long
Integer on Buffer/Array/ArrayBuffer in Pure JavaScript
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397621
Bug ID: 1397621
Summary: Review Request: nodejs-qtdatastream - Nodejs lib which
can read/write Qt formatted Datastreams
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397621
Ben Rosser changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1397620
--- Comment #1 from Ben Rosser
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
