[Bug 198922] Review Request: dejavu-lgc-fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dejavu-lgc-fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198922 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 02:50 EST --- Could you please package the newer 2.8 version of dejavu-lgc? As far as I can see it has some fixes for cyrillic and hinting for greek among other things for the lgc variant. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: gutenprint
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 03:01 EST ---
Paul,
Will check perl thing in gutenprint package.I have already created package
with Obsoletes and updates files are as
SPEC file: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint.spec
SRPM file:
http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint-5.0.0-0.2.rc3.fc5.src.rpm
If its not allowed to obsolete core packages then i can revert back changes in
SPEC. Also why not to package
%{_libdir}/gimp/*/plug-ins/print
under gutenprint?
Why mock build did not give any dependency error for both perl packages but
while installing final binary rpm it asked for perl-PerlMenu as well as
perl-Curses ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 03:14 EST --- But i solved dependency problem using perl-PerlMenu package and you have asked me to add perl(perlmenu) module package? What is correct package then? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 03:24 EST --- This is my first submission to Fedora Core and I need a sponsor for this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NOTABUG | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: gutenprint
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 03:54 EST ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Will check perl thing in gutenprint package.I have already created package
with Obsoletes and updates files are as
SPEC file: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint.spec
SRPM file:
http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint-5.0.0-0.2.rc3.fc5.src.rpm
You're still not using the package split suggested in the upstream README file.
Why not?
If its not allowed to obsolete core packages then i can revert back changes in
SPEC. Also why not to package
%{_libdir}/gimp/*/plug-ins/print
under gutenprint?
I didn't include this file because you didn't include it in your original
package. The reason you didn't include it is probably because you missed the
buildreq of gimp-devel, so it didn't get built. I think it actually belongs in a
separate subpackage. See the README file again.
Why mock build did not give any dependency error for both perl packages but
while installing final binary rpm it asked for perl-PerlMenu as well as
perl-Curses ?
mock will help you to find build-time dependencies (BuildRequires). It doesn't
help with runtime dependencies (Requires). The perl modules are only needed at
runtime, not build-time.
Did you find out where these dependencies are coming from?
(In reply to comment #13)
But i solved dependency problem using perl-PerlMenu package and you have asked
me to add perl(perlmenu) module package?
What is correct package then?
I believe it's using this:
http://search.cpan.org/dist/perlmenu/
The upstream name for this is all lower case.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199029] Review Request: jokosher
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 03:56 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) Is the resubmission located at the same URIs? Yes, it is. Regards Chris -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199234] New: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199234 Summary: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://bwmod.sourceforge.net OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Currently, Apache didn't support bandwidth limitation out-of-the-box. A small module exists which does the job, see URL for more. I have already a package built and in use for RHEL3 and RHEL4, first step to push this in future RHEL versions is afaik to get this into devel first. If one need the spec file, send a note. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 04:42 EST --- ok. I need some time to create gutenprint-extras, gutenprint-cups, gutenprint-foomatic packages as per given in README file of source tarball. will upload new SRPM once i finish its package building. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 04:48 EST --- (In reply to comment #15) ok. I need some time to create gutenprint-extras, gutenprint-cups, gutenprint-foomatic packages as per given in README file of source tarball. will upload new SRPM once i finish its package building. Good. I forgot to ask: did you understand why I made each of the changes to the spec file in Comment #8? If there's anything you're unsure about, please ask. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: gutenprint
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 05:14 EST ---
yes. I first understood all changes you made and then start working on SPEC.
What i understood well is %files section, language handling, package naming with
setup call must be with -n and package name like
%setup -q -n %{name}-%{version}%{?beta:-%{beta}}
and %configure call with --disable-static --disable-dependency-tracking
But i dont understand --disable-dependency-tracking option to %configure
Now i making changes to %configure call to add more options as per README
suggests to
%configure --disable-static --disable-dependency-tracking \
--with-foomatic --with-ghostscript \
--with-user-guide --with-samples \
--with-escputil
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 05:31 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) i dont understand --disable-dependency-tracking option to %configure Here's a good explanation: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-July/msg00156.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199234] Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199234 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 05:55 EST --- The procedure for new packages and contributors can be found here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors If you want to submit your package and be its maintainer in Fedora Extras, you'll need to follow the process described there and provide URLs for your spec file and SRPM here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199183] Review Request: e2tools - Manipulate files in unmounted ext2/ext3 filesystems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: e2tools - Manipulate files in unmounted ext2/ext3 filesystems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199183 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 06:13 EST --- Hi! I'm not yet sponsored so this is not official review. * MUST items: - rpmlint doesn't show anything - package is named according to Packaging Naming Guidelines - the spec file name is correct - package meets Packaging Guidelines - package is licensed with an open-source license - GPL, license field match actual license and package contains file with text of license in %doc - spec file is written in American English and is legible - package successfully compile on i386 - package doesn't contain duplicate files in %files section - %files section includes %defattr(...) line - spec file contains proper %clean section - macros is used proper in spec file and all others 'must' doesn't concern this package. I think you don't need CPPFLAGS=-Wall -Werror in %build section, because the build server has his own CPPFLAGS (I think so) and could you explain what %%check section exaclty does? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199234] Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199234 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 06:13 EST --- It was not my intention to become the maintainer of this package...it was only a suggestion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199234] Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199234 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 06:18 EST --- The package should probably be added here then: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList and this bug closed NOTABUG since there is no package to review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198711] Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198711 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 06:54 EST --- http://people.redhat.com/mitr/review/splint-3.1.1-16.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/mitr/review/splint.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198879] Review Request: kdnssd-avahi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdnssd-avahi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198879 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 06:56 EST --- Rex, could you please update the -devel description? I think that's the only complaint now. I'd like to get this in before devel freeze tomorrow, too... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191036] Review Request: libmp4v2 a library for handling the mp4 container format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libmp4v2 a library for handling the mp4 container format https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191036 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 07:03 EST --- The effort was nonexistant until five minutes ago when I sent an email to the upstream maintainer. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll add any new info here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198879] Review Request: kdnssd-avahi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdnssd-avahi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198879 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 07:34 EST --- - description for -devel should mention that it is development stuff. *Other* than saying (as it is now): Development files for kdnssd ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198879] Review Request: kdnssd-avahi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: kdnssd-avahi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198879
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 08:17 EST ---
Er.. my bad. I saw %description as %{summary} and thought it was the summary
from the main package, not from the devel package.
And since it is a snapshot, it is considered a pre release of the next
release.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 193109] Review Request: plotmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: plotmm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193109 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 08:18 EST --- I'm still interested to maintain this package. I have signed the CLA, and added myself to cvsextras and fedorabugs groups (step 4.a/b of the howto) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 |163776 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 09:29 EST --- Due to a file upload error; the Spec file URL changed to: http://pgfoundry.org/frs/download.php/971/postgresql-slony1-engine.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 09:31 EST --- I added subpackages and now updated SPEC file: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint.spec SRPM file: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint-5.0.0-0.3.rc3.fc5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199254] New: Review Request: perl-perlmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199254 Summary: Review Request: perl-perlmenu Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5.src.rpm Description: Perl library module for curses-based menus data-entry templates. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199254] Review Request: perl-perlmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-perlmenu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 09:38 EST --- When i ran rpmlint on Binary RPM i got E: perl-perlmenu no-binary W: perl-perlmenu siteperl-in-perl-module /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/menuutil.pl W: perl-perlmenu siteperl-in-perl-module /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/perlmenu.pm I am totally new to Perl packaging and when i checked perl packaging wiki page(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl), it did not help me. This is my first perl package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 09:40 EST --- Why did you add explicit dependencies on perl-Curses and perl-perlmenu? I noted earlier that the binary packages already have the correct perl dependencies, i.e. perl(Curses) and perl(perlmenu), auto-generated by RPM. There is no need to add any further dependencies, and in fact perl package name dependencies such as perl-Curses and perl-perlmenu should be avoided altogether, as per the discussion on perl(XML::Parser) in a different bugzilla ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199254] Review Request: perl-perlmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-perlmenu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 09:42 EST --- Use the perl template spec from fedora-rpmdevtools as a starting point instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198879] Review Request: kdnssd-avahi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdnssd-avahi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198879 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 09:47 EST --- %changelog * Tue Jul 18 2006 Rex Dieter rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net 0.1.3-0.1.20060713svn - since using snapshot, consider it a pre-release of next version Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/kdnssd-avahi.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdnssd-avahi-0.1.3-0.1.20060713svn.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197353] Review Request: man-pages-fr - French man pages from the Linux Documentation Project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: man-pages-fr - French man pages from the Linux Documentation Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197353 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 10:16 EST --- Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/man-pages-fr.spec SRPM URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/man-pages-fr-2.20.0-1.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jul 18 2006 Alain Portal aportal AT univ-montp2 DOT fr 2.20.0-1 - Update to 2.20.0 * Tue Jul 18 2006 Alain Portal aportal AT univ-montp2 DOT fr 2.19.0-1 - Update to 2.19.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198928] Review Request: lsscsi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lsscsi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192432] Review Request: compiz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compiz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776, 177841 | nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 10:52 EST --- This should block both FE-NEW and FE-NEEDSPONSOR. For some reason it kept getting changed from one to the other. Have you read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:00 EST --- Sorry, it is my fault. Sure, I've read almost all guidelines before submitting this. However, I had some problems using Bugzilla system and so, that's why I made some mistakes. Now this blocks both FE-NEW and FE-NEEDSPONSOR. Thanks. Devrim -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 195659] Review Request: qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195659 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:26 EST --- Given package is in Extras, not needed in core at this time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184331] Review Request: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184331 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:29 EST --- Did you see Fedora packages at http://www.planetsaphire.com/rpms/k3d/? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198881] Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:30 EST --- Updated to add licensing clarification. Spec URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-POE-Filter-IRCD.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-POE-Filter-IRCD-1.7-0.1.fc5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 195659] Review Request: qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195659 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|188265 | nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198944] Review Request: compiz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compiz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198944 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO_REPORTER OtherBugsDependingO|188267 |188268 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:31 EST --- Changes look good, rpmlint is fine (with ignores in place) Approving. Who wants to own this package in dist-fc6, and how will we put it in Comps? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198879] Review Request: kdnssd-avahi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdnssd-avahi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198879 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO_REPORTER OtherBugsDependingO|188267 |188268 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:33 EST --- New version looks good. All other things look good. I assume that this will be a Requires of something else, and doesn't need its own comps entry, correct? Setting Peter to owner and adding to dist-fc6. Please close when built into rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198881] Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:45 EST ---
BuildArch: noarch
= These lines are superfluous - Remove them.
%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=%{optflags}
find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -a -size 0 -exec rm -f {} ';'
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198881] Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) BuildArch: noarch = These lines are superfluous Oops, too fast on the send button: The find line and the OPTIMIZES in the lines cited are superfluous - Remove them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199212] Review Request: dbus-glib and dbus-python (split out from the dbus package)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dbus-glib and dbus-python (split out from the dbus package) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199212 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO_REPORTER OtherBugsDependingO|188265 |188268 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:50 EST --- dbus-glib: NEEDSWORK: - buildroot wrong - Can Source0 be a URL to the source? - Bring %post and %postun up to single line, %post -n /sbin/ldconfig... dbus-python: NEEDSWOR: - pyver define not actually used, nor needed. - can Source0 be a URL to the source? RPMLINT on the sourcerpm is clean for now, other than license which is ignorable. We'll have to rpmlint after imported. WHen importing can you fix the little issues I mentioned above? Otherwise approving. Set you to owner, in dist-fc6. Please close when built into dist-fc6 (and rpmlint passes on build packages) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198882] Review Request: perl-POE-Component-IRC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Component-IRC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198882
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 11:51 EST ---
BuildArch: noarch
=
...
%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=%{optflags}
...
find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -a -size 0 -exec rm -f {} ';'
...
= remove this find and the OPTIMIZE
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184331] Review Request: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184331 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 12:03 EST --- Will look at it. My development system is in a container in a boat in the middle of the atlantic, so I won't be able to work on this package for another month or so. K3D would take about 24 hours to compile on this old laptop :-( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198881] Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 12:09 EST --- Ralf, honestly, please stop hammering on the packagers and get the Perl specfile template changed instead. Maybe make fedora-newrpmspec call into cpanspec instead, which will not generate the bits you object to for noarch packages. I'm not going to block on anything that's just following the template that we put in place for them to follow. Chris, thanks for clarifying the license issue after our discussion on IRC. Review: * source files match upstream: 30ab7c5504eb6d99c7d3da399933efac POE-Filter-IRCD-1.7.tar.gz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * latest version is being packaged. O BuildRequires are proper (BR: perl is unnecessary) O Compiler flags are appropriate (no need to pass them to the makefile of a noarch package) * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * noarch package, no debuginfo. * final provides and requires are sane: perl(POE::Filter::IRCD) = 1.7 perl-POE-Filter-IRCD = 1.7-0.fc6 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(vars) perl(warnings) * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=7, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 cusr + 0.01 csys = 0.03 CPU) * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199173] Review Request: clusterssh
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: clusterssh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199173
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 12:20 EST ---
There is a problem with Version and URL. There is no such version at project
page. What is on the project page is 3.18.1. So:
Version: 3.8.1
Release: 1%{dist}
should be better; so that it will reflect the upstream version.
Also,the download URL should be:
http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
BTW, rpmlint does not report any error.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198922] Review Request: dejavu-lgc-fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dejavu-lgc-fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198922 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 12:23 EST --- dejavu-lgc-fonts-2.8-1 should appear in rawhide tonight -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198944] Review Request: compiz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compiz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198944 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 12:27 EST --- package owner will be krh, I'll handle the initial import and comps addition -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198944] Review Request: compiz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compiz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198944 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 12:51 EST --- package added to dist. Please close when built into rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197353] Review Request: man-pages-fr - French man pages from the Linux Documentation Project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: man-pages-fr - French man pages from the Linux Documentation Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197353 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:06 EST --- Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/man-pages-fr.spec SRPM URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/man-pages-fr-2.21.0-1.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jul 18 2006 Alain Portal aportal AT univ-montp2 DOT fr 2.21.0-1 - Update to 2.21.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197826] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-SSL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-SSL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197826 Bug 197826 depends on bug 197827, which changed state. Bug 197827 Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-SSLeay https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197827 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197827] Review Request: perl-Net-SSLeay
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-SSLeay https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197827 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:07 EST --- Was built into rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197827] Review Request: perl-Net-SSLeay
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-SSLeay https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197827 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:07 EST --- Was built into rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197963] Review Request: bouncycastle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bouncycastle https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197963 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:07 EST --- Was built into rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 196748] Review Request: setroubleshoot - automatic diagnosis of SELinux problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: setroubleshoot - automatic diagnosis of SELinux problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196748 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO_REPORTER --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:08 EST --- Please close this when the package is built into rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198711] Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198711 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|188272 |188273 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:35 EST --- Looks good now. Accepting. Tim, now in your hands. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197826] Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-SSL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-IO-Socket-SSL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197826 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 13:50 EST --- Warren, Could you update IO::Socket::SSL to version 0.991? http://search.cpan.org/dist/IO-Socket-SSL/ Tia, jpo PS - Still no Fedora Core bugzilla component. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199173] Review Request: clusterssh
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clusterssh https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199173 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 14:29 EST --- As mentioned in the initial request, I have raised this before commiting branch changes to the project source. After all issues with the spec file (and desktop file and icons isnall etc) are fixed (apart from the version matching the upstream version), then I will commit project code and release properly. I didnt want to field lots of problems with the project just after releasing a new version (the SRPM contains the correct tar.gz file). The Source0 download URL has been fixed, and new spec file and SRPM generated and are available as per the initial request. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198944] Review Request: compiz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compiz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198944 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198711] Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198711 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO_REPORTER --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 14:42 EST --- Please import this into ist CVS and then I'll create the RHEL-5 branch, add it to comps, and set up brew. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199310] New: Review Request: sturmbahnfahrer - Simulated obstacle course for automobiles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199310 Summary: Review Request: sturmbahnfahrer - Simulated obstacle course for automobiles Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sturmbahnfahrer.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sturmbahnfahrer-1.1-1.src.rpm Description: Sturmbahnfahrer... for expert drivers only. If you want to master the obstacle course, try to have the laws of physics work with you, not against you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 16:30 EST ---
This failed to build for me in a rather odd way:
+ find /var/tmp/eric-3.9.0-3.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages
-not -type d -name '*.pyo'
+ sed 's:/var/tmp/eric-3.9.0-3.fc6-root-mockbuild\(.*\):%ghost \1:'
+ '%{_python_sitedir}/eric3config.pyo'
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.51706: line 76: fg: no job control
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.51706 (%install)
Perhaps remove the underscore from %{_python_sitedir}? I tried, and the build
failed with:
+ /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/eric3config.pyo
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.74633: line 76:
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/eric3config.pyo: No such file or directory
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.74633 (%install)
I changed those two lines in the %if %{?fedora} 4 bit to echo the
filenames into the files.list and things do build, but I don't think that's what
you intended. Did you want to %ghost those two files?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198711] Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: splint - An implementation of the lint program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198711 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 18:44 EST --- Imported. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199310] Review Request: sturmbahnfahrer - Simulated obstacle course for automobiles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sturmbahnfahrer - Simulated obstacle course for automobiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199310 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 19:16 EST --- Build fails in mock: BR alsa-lib-devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199029] Review Request: jokosher
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 19:55 EST --- I have now updated the files following the release of jokosher 0.1 These are at: http://www.iammetal.co.uk/jokosher.spec http://www.iammetal.co.uk/jokosher-0.1-2.src.rpm Regards Chris -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199254] Review Request: perl-perlmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: perl-perlmenu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199254
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 19:59 EST ---
Or use cpanspec, which is in Extras. (Although wow, this thing is packaged
*really* poorly. cpanspec dies fairly spectacularly on it.)
Since that isn't going to work, here are some useful suggestions:
Source0:
http://mirror.gnowledge.org/cpan/authors/id/S/SK/SKUNZ/perlmenu.v%{version}.tar.gz
Don't hard-code a mirror. Use www.cpan.org.
install -d
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT{%{perl_sitelib},%{_usrsrc}/examples/%{name}-%{version}}
install -m 644 perlmenu.pm menuutil.pl $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{perl_sitelib}
%{perl_sitelib}/*
s/sitelib/vendorlib/g
I don't think %{_usrsrc} is ever an appropriate place for anything. Try just
including %doc examples in your %files section.
If you find examples -type f -exec chmod 644 {} \; in %prep, rpm shouldn't
pick up any dependencies from the example scripts either.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199234] Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199234 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 195221] Review Request: pulseaudio: Improved Linux sound server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pulseaudio: Improved Linux sound server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195221 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 20:08 EST --- When compiling the src.rpm on current Development I get the following error: gcc -shared .libs/libpulsecore_la-channelmap.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-error.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-mainloop.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-mainloop-api.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-mainloop-signal.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sample.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-timeval.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-utf8.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-util.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-volume.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-xmalloc.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-autoload.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-cli-command.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-cli-text.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-client.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-conf-parser.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-core.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-core-scache.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-core-subscribe.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-core-util.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-dynarray.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-g711.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-hashmap.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-idxset.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-log.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-mcalign.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-memblock.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-memblockq.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-memchunk.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-modargs.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-modinfo.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-module.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-namereg.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-pid.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-pipe.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-play-memchunk.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-poll.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-props.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-queue.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-random.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-resampler.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sample-util.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sconv.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sconv-s16be.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sconv-s16le.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sink .o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sink-input.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sioman.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sound-file.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-sound-file-stream.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-source.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-source-output.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-strbuf.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-tokenizer.o .libs/libpulsecore_la-core-error.o /usr/lib/libltdl.so -lsamplerate -lsndfile -loil-0.3 -lcap -ldl -lm -pthread -Wl,-soname -Wl,libpulsecore.so.0 -o .libs/libpulsecore.so.0.0.1 /usr/lib/libltdl.so: could not read symbols: File in wrong format collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [libpulsecore.la] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/pulseaudio-0.9.2/src' make[2]: *** [all] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/pulseaudio-0.9.2/src' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/pulseaudio-0.9.2' make: *** [all] Error 2 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.26234 (%build) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199234] Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Suggestion: mod_bw for Apache for bandwidth limitation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199234 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 21:34 EST --- Hello, Peter. I've added this to the Extras/WishList for you (per your email to me) and I will close this as NOTABUG. Thanks for your suggestion though! :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198881] Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-18 23:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) Ralf, honestly, please stop hammering on the packagers and get the Perl specfile template changed instead. Jason, honestly, this issue really p* me off. I would prefer you to stop blindly approving such sloppily and carelessly packaged packages and you undermining what had been perl package packaging practice almost ever since FE exists. Almost no other packages but Chris submitted/Jason approved perl packages in FE contain the OPTIMIZE/find *.bs. (In reply to comment #5) It's a template, not a release-ready spec file. Exactly. People are supposed to customize it. (In reply to comment #5) But I'm not going to make Chris change all of his specs when: You better should. To me Chris has sufficently demonstrated his resistance to learning. 1) The extra bits aren't harmful. As I've repeatedly said, you can not be sure about this. 2) They're in the template we tell people to use. It's a template - not a form, nor is a review a government's agency's bureaucratic act nor a mechanical act. Do I wish Chris would eliminate the unneeded bits? Yes. Then you should better teach him to do so. You wouldn't use the OPTIMIZE and the find in non-perl *.specs? Using them in noarch packages are equally useful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197734] Review Request: xmoto - Challenging 2D Motocross Platform Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmoto - Challenging 2D Motocross Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197734 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-19 00:26 EST --- Package updated with fix from Comment #2: Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/fextras/SPECS/xmoto.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/fextras/SRPMS/xmoto-0.1.16-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199254] Review Request: perl-perlmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-perlmenu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-19 00:30 EST --- as per your suggestions i added foolowing line with examples %doc FAQ MENUUTIL_DOC MENU_DOC README RELEASE_NOTES TO_DO COPYING examples but i got cp: cannot stat `examples': No such file or directory how can i solve this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198881] Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-19 00:46 EST --- Ok, I think the rhetoric here is getting a touch out of hand, and making a very large issue out of a not-so-large one. Perl modules are fairly special, in that basically the same specfile can handle all of them (with package specific description, etc, being adapted, of course). They're also special in that there's a LOT of them. For those two reasons, I try to hew as close to the specfile template as possible. -- The closer to the template a perl module spec is the more readily apparent errors are, especially when there's a _lot_ of them. -- It's easy to scan a perl spec and almost instinctively know when something is missing, when as little deviation as necessary is made from it. Ralf, I do not do this mindlessly, without thinking, or sloppily. I do check to ensure the extra lines (w.r.t. OPTIMIZE) doesn't adversely impact the building of the package. I'm not resistant to learning, and in fact find myself learning daily and seeking input. To date I haven't been provided with any reason why, in my judgement, it would be advantagous to abandon this practice. If you want, bring this issue before the packaging committee. If guidelines come down or new spec templates are issued recommending the dropping of those lines, I'll comply. Until then, can we not accept it as a legitimate choice a packager may make under the guidelines? Can we continue this discussion off bugzilla -- in any bug -- if we absolutely must? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198882] Review Request: perl-POE-Component-IRC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Component-IRC https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198882 Bug 198882 depends on bug 198881, which changed state. Bug 198881 Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Filter-IRCD https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198881 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199254] Review Request: perl-perlmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-perlmenu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-19 00:58 EST --- I checked for above error, it will not work as source itself does not contain any examples directory. So i tried to overwirte docdir but it failed with error: magic_file(ms, /var/tmp/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5-root-root/usr/share/doc/perl-perlmenu-4.0/examples) failed: mode 040755 cannot open `/var/tmp/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5-root-root/usr/share/doc/perl-perlmenu-4.0/examples' (No such file or directory) rpmbuild: rpmfc.c:1251: rpmfcClassify: Assertion `ftype != ((void *)0)' failed. Aborted My Updated files Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199108] gutenprint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: gutenprint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-19 01:10 EST --- Updated version SPEC file: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint.spec SRPM file: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/gutenprint/gutenprint-5.0.0-0.4.rc3.fc5.src.rpm ChangeLog for this new version * Wed Jul 19 2006 Parag Nemade [EMAIL PROTECTED]- 5.0.0-0.4.rc3 - Removed Requires on perl-Curses and perl-perlmenu as both are automatically added on binary RPM - Commented Obsoletes and provides tag as Fedora Extras package can not Obsoletes Fedora Core Package. rpmlint on gutenprint-extras, gutenprint-cups, gutenprint-foomatic gives W: gutenprint-extras no-documentation -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199386] New: Review Request: aspell-mi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199386 Summary: Review Request: aspell-mi Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/aspell-mi.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/aspell-mi-0.50-1.src.rpm Description: GNU Aspell Maori Dictionary Package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199386] Review Request: aspell-mi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: aspell-mi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199386 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-19 01:42 EST --- Note that this package, like other aspell's language packs, does not come up cleanly through rpmlint, but with the following errors: E: aspell-mi no-binary E: aspell-mi only-non-binary-in-usr-lib This is because the package contains only data files which sit under /usr/lib. They have to stay there, as they are architecture-dependent (due to byte-ordering issues). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
