https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755084
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schneider ---
Aurélien, python packing differs in Fedora compared to openSUSE. We have macros
which should be used.
If I look for tags at https://github.com/aaptel/smbcmp the list is empty.
--
You are receiving t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749383
--- Comment #23 from Javi Roman ---
Spec URL:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jromanes/rpms/mesos/raw/f30/f/mesos.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/javiroman/mesos-rpm/raw/master/mesos-1.8.1-4.fc30.src.rpm
New candidate:
- Removed non-fr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1720456
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2019-0bbacc4ff2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-0bbacc4ff2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755870
Bug ID: 1755870
Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep-Fuzzy - Fuzzy number
comparison with Test::Deep
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755892
Bug ID: 1755892
Summary: Review Request: rust-jql - JSON query language CLI
tool
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1743814
Yanko Kaneti changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1755894
Referenced Bugs:
https://bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754039
--- Comment #6 from Miro Hrončok ---
This information just came in:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1719978#c26
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752288
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1743814
Bug 1743814 depends on bug 1755894, which changed state.
Bug 1755894 Summary: Drop edid-decode from xorg-x11-utils following upstream
move
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755894
What|Removed |Adde
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1743814
--- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/edid-decode
--
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=1743814
Yanko Kaneti changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749383
--- Comment #24 from Tom "spot" Callaway ---
(In reply to Javi Roman from comment #23)
> Spec URL:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/jromanes/rpms/mesos/raw/f30/f/mesos.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://github.com/javiroman/mesos-rpm/raw/master/m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1747996
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|MODIFIED
--- Comment #8 from F
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1747996
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2019-bd5b8af484 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-bd5b8af484
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1747996
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2019-30f9ba1c80 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-30f9ba1c80
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755892
--- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa ---
This package needs a license file, especially as it's MIT licensed, and there's
far too many variants of that...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always no
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755892
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ngomp...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750047
Wolfgang Ulbrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fed...@raveit.de
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750047
--- Comment #21 from Artem ---
(In reply to Wolfgang Ulbrich from comment #20)
> Why depending on gnome-shell-extension-appindicator?
It is not depending on gnome-shell, it is install as weak dependency
'gnome-shell-extension-appindicator' on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750047
Vitaly Zaitsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(vitaly@easycoding |
|.org)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1755084
--- Comment #4 from Aurélien Aptel ---
The official website and repo is https://smbcmp.github.io and
https://github.com/smbcmp/smbcmp (the tag is there).
--
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=1750047
--- Comment #23 from Wolfgang Ulbrich ---
(In reply to Vitaly Zaitsev from comment #22)
> > Why depending on gnome-shell-extension-appindicator? This looks complete
> > worse!
>
> It use weak dependencies to install shell tray support plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752288
--- Comment #11 from Richard Shaw ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #10)
>
> (*) I think the license can be simplified to just "BSD". BSD can always be
> "upgraded" to GPLv3.
I've done that in the past but the Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750047
--- Comment #24 from Artem ---
(In reply to Wolfgang Ulbrich from comment #23)
> `dnf install mate-optimus` pulls in gnome-shell-extension-appindicator in
> mate-session.
This definitely not work as intended. :( I'll fix this for sure.
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750047
--- Comment #25 from Vitaly Zaitsev ---
> Why should someone add a mate package to gnome-hell?
This is a boolean weak dependency. It will install plugin **only** if user has
Gnome Shell installed.
> `dnf install mate-optimus` pulls in gnome-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749383
Simone Caronni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #25 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749383
--- Comment #26 from Simone Caronni ---
I've sponsored you in FAS. I'll be away for the weekend, so I will follow up on
monday.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750938
--- Comment #3 from Artem ---
Spec URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-failure-tools.spec
SRPM URL:
https://atim.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-failure-tools-4.0.3-1.fc30.src.rpm
Now with license file.
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754039
Carl George changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749383
Tom "spot" Callaway changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal) |
--- Comment #27 from Tom "spot
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753769
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|MODIFIED
--- Comment #8 from F
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753769
--- Comment #9 from Carl George ---
Rawhide: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-a0a029b8d4
--
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1739816
--- Comment #8 from Ege Güneş ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #7)
> (In reply to Ege Güneş from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #5)
> > > - That's not needed, the file should be in licensedir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ngomp...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Link ID||Launchpad 1844684
--- Comment #3 from Ne
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa ---
Notes through initial pass of review:
> %global _pkgdocdir %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
Why are we overriding pkgdocdir this way?
> Suggests: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
This should be using "E
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
--- Comment #5 from Miro Hrončok ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4)
> Notes through initial pass of review:
>
> > %global _pkgdocdir %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
>
> Why are we overriding pkgdocdir this way?
Copypasta from bzr, w
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
--- Comment #6 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #5)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4)
> > Notes through initial pass of review:
> >
> > > %global _pkgdocdir %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
> >
> > Why are we
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752288
Richard Shaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: coin - |Review Request: coin4 -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
--- Comment #7 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #6)
> (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4)
> > > > ln -s brz.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/bzr.1
> > >
> > > This doesn
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752288
--- Comment #13 from Richard Shaw ---
Ok, let's talk about this one more time... Since I can't have the name "coin"
I'm thinking I should go ahead and use "Coin4" for consistency with Coin2 and
Coin3. I think consistency with the other package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754964
--- Comment #8 from Miro Hrončok ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #6)
> > > > ln -s brz.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/bzr.1
> > >
> > > This doesn't do *exactly* the thing you expect. Do something like this:
> > >
> > > > # Link bzr(
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1664399
--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System ---
mp3gain-1.6.2-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750263
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750263
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
eralchemy-1.2.10-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1720456
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from Fedo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753769
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #10 from Fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1747996
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #11 from Fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1747996
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
powdertoy-94.1-4.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753769
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
doh-0.1-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. If problems
still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
i
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1747996
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
powdertoy-94.1-4.1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Test
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1720456
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
ghc-http-directory-0.1.5-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752288
--- Comment #14 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
(In reply to Richard Shaw from comment #13)
> Ok, let's talk about this one more time... Since I can't have the name
> "coin" I'm thinking I should go ahead and use "Coin4" for consistency w
53 matches
Mail list logo
