[Bug 204151] Review Request:perl-File-NFSLock - Perl module to do NFS (or not) locking
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-File-NFSLock - Perl module to do NFS (or not) locking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204151 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 02:02 EST --- I see there's an examples directory/script, but it's not included in %doc. Let's include that, and this package is approved. + 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. License text not included upstream. + source files match upstream: 68bddc5e2c32d9748ae689f398fc1147 File-NFSLock-1.20.tar.gz 68bddc5e2c32d9748ae689f398fc1147 File-NFSLock-1.20.tar.gz.srpm + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + package builds in mock (5/x86_64) + rpmlint is silent. + final provides and requires are sane: ** perl-File-NFSLock-1.20-1.fc5.noarch.rpm == rpmlint == provides perl(File::NFSLock) = 1.20 perl-File-NFSLock = 1.20-1.fc5 == requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(vars) + 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. + %clean is present. + %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=12, Tests=161, 42 wallclock secs ( 0.69 cusr + 0.82 csys = 1.51 CPU) + 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. + not a web app. -- 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 02:51 EST --- Ok, the CLA is now accepted. I've added myself to the cvsextras group, so feel free to approve that. :) -- 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 204151] Review Request:perl-File-NFSLock - Perl module to do NFS (or not) locking
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-File-NFSLock - Perl module to do NFS (or not) locking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204151 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 04:17 EST --- examples added with chmod -x: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/perl-File-NFSLock-1.20-1.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 204250] Review Request: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator
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: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 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 204250] Review Request: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator
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: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204250
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 06:33 EST ---
I will review this package.
1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines :
* rpmlint issue
( also * Exclusion of Static Libraries )
- W: ngspice devel-file-in-non-devel-package \
/usr/lib/ng-spice-rework/libbsim4.a
This static archive should be removed unless there
is a reason that this must be installed.
(Try if this package works well with this archive
removed.)
* Compiler flags
- This package does not accept Fedora specific compilation
flags and debuginfo rpm is useless.
Fix Makefile or the environment of make invocation
to use Fedora specific compilation flags.
(See build log).
2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
* shared library files
- Does this package require to call ldconfig? This package
does not have any shared libraries in default paths.
3. Other things I have noticed :
* Spec file cosmetic issue
- I think that %{_mandir}/man1/ngnutmeg.1* is more preferable
than %{_mandir}/man1/ngnutmeg.1.gz .
* File entry
- /usr/share/doc/ngspice-doc-17/doc/ngspice.info* and
/usr/share/info/ngspice.info* may be duplicate. Check if
both of these are needed.
* Mock issue
- Ah...
I don't know how to use this package at all!!
However, I watched some URL and tried:
$ cat rc.cir EOF
Basic RC circuit
r 1 2 1.0
c 2 0 1.0
vin 1 0 pulse (0 1) ac 1
.tran 0.1 7.0
.plot tran v(2) i(vin)
.end
EOF
$ ngspice -b -r rc.raw rc.cir
$ ngnutmeg rc.raw
...
ngnutmeg * - plot v(2)
Then I installed ngspice with rebuilt in mock, I got...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] NGSPICE2]$ ngnutmeg rc.raw
**
** ngnutmeg-17 : data analysis and manipulation program
** The U. C. Berkeley CAD Group
** Copyright 1985-1994, Regents of the University of California.
** Please submit bug-reports to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** Creation Date: Mon Aug 28 04:04:22 EDT 2006
**
external error: no graphics interface; please check compiling instructions
Loading raw data file (rc.raw) . . . done.
Title: Basic RC circuit
Name: Transient Analysis
Date: Mon Aug 28 19:18:36 2006
ngnutmeg 4 - plot v(2)
Can't open viewport for graphics.
ngnutmeg 5 -
and.. when I tried the rpm rebuilt with normal rpmbuild,
I got a X window graph (perhaps as expected)
So, again, some BR are missing. I attach a full mock build
log. The diff I am concerned in is:
@@ -189,31 +478,14 @@
checking whether a program can dlopen itself... (cached) yes
checking whether a statically linked program can dlopen itself... (cached) yes
appending configuration tag F77 to libtool
-checking if libtool supports shared libraries... yes
-checking whether to build shared libraries... yes
-checking whether to build static libraries... yes
-checking for f95 option to produce PIC... -fPIC
-checking if f95 PIC flag -fPIC works... yes
-checking if f95 supports -c -o file.o... yes
-checking whether the f95 linker (/usr/bin/ld) supports shared libraries... yes
-checking dynamic linker characteristics... GNU/Linux ld.so
-checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate
-checking whether stripping libraries is possible... yes
checking whether windows code is enabled... no
-checking for X... libraries , headers in standard search path
-checking for gethostbyname... yes
-checking for connect... yes
-checking for remove... yes
-checking for shmat... yes
-checking for IceConnectionNumber in -lICE... yes
-checking for main in -lXaw... yes
-checking for main in -lXmu... yes
-checking for XShmAttach in -lXext... yes
-checking for bison... bison -y
-checking for flex... flex
-checking for yywrap in -lfl... yes
-checking lex output file root... lex.yy
-checking whether yytext is a pointer... yes
+checking for X... no
+checking for bison... no
+checking for byacc... no
+checking for flex... no
+checking for lex... no
+checking for yywrap in -lfl... no
+checking for yywrap in -ll... no
checking for pid_t... yes
checking return type of signal handlers... void
checking for dirent.h that defines DIR... yes
@@ -295,7 +567,7 @@
checking readline/history.h usability... yes
checking readline/history.h presence... yes
checking for readline/history.h... yes
-checking for library containing tputs... -lncurses
+checking for library containing tputs... -ltermcap
checking for readline in -lreadline... yes
BSD editline disabled.
configure: creating ./config.status
@@ -447,12 +719,7 @@
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
-checking for X... libraries , headers in standard search path
-checking for gethostbyname... yes
[Bug 204250] Review Request: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator
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: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204250 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 06:38 EST --- Created an attachment (id=135036) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=135036action=view) Build log of ngspice-17-1 with normal rpmbuild Build log of ngspice-17-1 with normal rpmbuild. You can see the Fedora specific compilation flags -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables is not passed. -- 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 204250] Review Request: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator
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: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204250 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 06:40 EST --- Created an attachment (id=135037) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=135037action=view) Mock build log of ngspice-17-1 Mock build log of ngspice-17-1. Please compare this with the previous build of (with normal rpmbuid) to find the missing BuildRequires. -- 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 07:42 EST --- OK, you are now sponsored. Import pulseaudio into cvs, and mark this as Resolved-NextRelease when done. -- 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 190189] Review Request: PyQt4: Python bindings for 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: PyQt4: Python bindings for Qt4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190189 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 08:20 EST --- FYI, PyQt4 doesn't build against qt4-4.2 (yet), so don't bother trying to build on/for fc6. -- 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 190189] Review Request: PyQt4: Python bindings for 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: PyQt4: Python bindings for Qt4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190189 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 08:24 EST --- Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/PyQt4.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/PyQt4-4.0.1-3.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Aug 28 2006 Rex Dieter rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net 4.0.1-3 - BR: qt4-devel 4.2 -- 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 204152] Review Request: orca - Accessibility replacement for gnopernicus
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: orca - Accessibility replacement for gnopernicus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 09:20 EST --- just to clarify: orca is replacing both gnopernicus and gnome-mag, right ? -- 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 204259] Review Request: geda - Project manager for gEDA
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: geda - Project manager for gEDA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204259 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 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 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] 2006-08-28 11:04 EST --- Note that we plan on replacing esound in FC7 with pulseaudio. pulseaudio is supposed to be some kind of drop-in replacement to esound. So for FC7 we need pulseaudio to co-exist without conflicting or removing esound, but FC7 we need to design a smooth upgrade path for both the sound server and packages that currently depend on it by name. -- 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 204259] Review Request: geda - Project manager for gEDA
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: geda - Project manager for gEDA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 11:34 EST --- Reviewing: This package is almost okay. 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : * BuildRequires: pkgconfig can be removed because glib2-devel requires pkgconfig and gtk2-devel (this is written) requires glib2-devel . * Summary and description (This is a suggestion) Could you explain this package (geda) more concretely on Summary ? Perhaps you can use the description on http://www.geda.seul.org/ . 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : - Okay. 3. Other things I have noticed : Well, again I don't know how to use this package. However, as far as I can tell now, if I type geda a gtk-2 application window is popped up and it seems okay. The requirements of this package makes no difference between the one rebuilt with normal rpmbuild and the one rebuilt in mock. I would appreciate it if you can attach a simple test case by which I can check if this package work well. -- 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 204151] Review Request:perl-File-NFSLock - Perl module to do NFS (or not) locking
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-File-NFSLock - Perl module to do NFS (or not) locking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204151 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 11:38 EST --- 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 204152] Review Request: orca - Accessibility replacement for gnopernicus
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: orca - Accessibility replacement for gnopernicus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 11:53 EST --- Yes it does. I need to add teh obsolete. -- 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 165689] Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid
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: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165689 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 12:01 EST --- This says fixed in 5, but I don't see this package either in Core or Extras. Am I not looking in the correct location or did it never get built? -- 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 201656] Review Request: gstm-1.2
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: gstm-1.2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201656 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 12:05 EST --- Still owns %datadir/pixmaps. %description still says Gstm instead of gSTM. -- 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 204259] Review Request: geda - Project manager for gEDA
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: geda - Project manager for gEDA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 12:09 EST --- Hello Mamoru, thanks for reviewing my packages. Geda is a suite of Electronic Design Automation tools. Hence it consists of several packages which all can be accessible by the Geda package (this package 204259) itself. I haven't packaged all of them yet, once done, ill file bug for each and set related depends on. This explains why the items on the 'tool' menu are not working. I'll ping you once ready ok? -- 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 204162] Review Request: perl-Heap - Perl extension for keeping data partially sorted
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-Heap - Perl extension for keeping data partially sorted https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204162 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 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 204162] Review Request: perl-Heap - Perl extension for keeping data partially sorted
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-Heap - Perl extension for keeping data partially sorted https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204162 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 12:20 EST --- + 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. License text not included upstream. + source files match upstream: 6934be7ffe351b3eea844d24a07ebc36 Heap-0.71.tar.gz 6934be7ffe351b3eea844d24a07ebc36 Heap-0.71.tar.gz.srpm + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + package builds in mock (5/x86_64). + rpmlint is silent. + final provides and requires are sane: ** perl-Heap-0.71-1.fc5.noarch.rpm == rpmlint == provides perl(Heap) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Binary) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Binomial) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem::Num) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem::NumRev) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem::Ref) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem::RefRev) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem::Str) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Elem::StrRev) = 0.71 perl(Heap::Fibonacci) = 0.71 perl-Heap = 0.71-1.fc5 == requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(AutoLoader) perl(Exporter) perl(Heap::Fibonacci) perl(strict) perl(vars) + 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. + %clean is present. + %check is present and all tests pass + 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. + not a web 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 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 12:44 EST --- So it will be moved into core 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 199780] Review Request: dstat
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: dstat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199780 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 13:04 EST --- You need sponsorship. The best way to do that is submit a couple of packages then those who have the power to do so can correctly evaluate if you understand the packaging rules. -- 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 204343] Review Request: qcomicbook - a comic book viewing 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: qcomicbook - a comic book viewing program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204343 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 13:13 EST --- Good catch... Updated and reposted. SRPM: http://www.perturb.org/tmp/qcomicbook-0.3.2-3.src.rpm Spec URL: http://www.perturb.org/tmp/qcomicbook.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 199780] Review Request: dstat
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: dstat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199780 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 13:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) So what's next? All I want to do is get this package in the extras tree. And qcomicbook? :-) You can also do reviews. This is explained in Comment #13, Comment #15, and http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored If you'd like, I can unassign this bug and you can seek someone else on fedora-extras to sponsor you. They'll probably review qcomicbook and look at this bug to judge how knowledgable you are and then decide if they want you to do reviews or anything else to show your knowledge. Your call. -- 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 204259] Review Request: geda - Project manager for gEDA
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: geda - Project manager for gEDA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 13:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) Geda is a suite of Electronic Design Automation tools. Hence it consists of several packages which all can be accessible by the Geda package (this package 204259) itself. Well, then this package is something like the central package of Geda related packages, I can think? Then it might be preferable that the explanation of Geda is included in this package, however, this is a suggestion and is up to you. I haven't packaged all of them yet, once done, ill file bug for each and set related depends onment. This explains why the items on the 'tool' menu are not working. I'll ping you once ready ok? Okay. However, it may take time for me to review all your packages only by myself... Anyway, the left points for this package is very few as I mentioned in the comment #2 . -- 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 204168] Review Request: libgeda - the library needed by gEDA applications.
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: libgeda - the library needed by gEDA applications. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204168 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 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 204343] Review Request: qcomicbook - a comic book viewing 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: qcomicbook - a comic book viewing program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204343 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 13:51 EST --- Updated the package with the comments in #3. rpmlint is clean on the SRPM and the binary RPM. SRPM: http://www.perturb.org/tmp/qcomicbook-0.3.2-4.src.rpm Spec URL: http://www.perturb.org/tmp/qcomicbook.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 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 14:04 EST --- Does this current version co-exist with esound without causing conflicts? -- 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 204263] Review Request: geda-symbols - Electronic symbols for gEDA
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: geda-symbols - Electronic symbols for gEDA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204263 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 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 189093] Review Request: mono-debugger
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: mono-debugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189093 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 14:21 EST --- Better with the libdir fix, but still needs some work: - Missing a %defattr entry for devel package - Source0 is 404, looks like you want http://go-mono.com/sources/mono-debugger/mono-debugger-0.30.tar.gz - don't disable debug, there is debugging symbols. - license is not LGPL, looks like MIT -- 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 14:42 EST --- No direct conflicts no. Only one can have the local socket though of course. There aren't really any ways pulse can conflict with esound, apart from replacing esd with the esdcompat script. -- 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 189093] Review Request: mono-debugger
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: mono-debugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189093 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 15:08 EST --- Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/mono-debugger.spec Fixes all from #15 - tar ball is the same -- 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 204250] Review Request: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator
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: Ngspice - A mixed level/signal circuit simulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204250 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 15:21 EST --- Updated: Spec URL: http://chitlesh.googlepages.com/ngspice.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.googlepages.com/ngspice-17-2.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 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] 2006-08-28 15:33 EST ---
rpmlint is not clean on the srpm - all warnings
strange-permission jokosher 0755
3 patches not applied (patch0, 1, 2)
invalid-licence (not worried about this one as discussed before - also applies
to the rpm)
mock does, indeed, build cleanly
The URL you have above for the spec file is invalid.
Looking at the spec file I have some concerns
1. Why have you got patches in the install section - they should be in prep. You
can also make them easier on the eye by using
%patch0 -p1
and that's it!
2. You need to read
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python?highlight=%28python%29 as the
python packaging guides have changed. It means %ghost has gone (amongst other
things)
3. I can't allow install -p -m 0755 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}. All
binaries have to be from the package itself and not just dragged from some
random website or other - the possibility for interception and security problems
is boundless like that. If you need a file (such as patch) you bundle it with
the srpm, this is then installed happily into the SOURCES directory when the
srpm is installed.
4. The line mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{python_sitelib}/%{name} is not required. It's
automatically created by the next mkdir line down.
--
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 200976] Review Request: cyphesis - WorldForge game 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: cyphesis - WorldForge game server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200976
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 16:39 EST ---
Okay, this builds happily in mock, rpmlint is clean and I'm happy with the IPv6
statement in #27
Review time...
Comment...
%package selinux
Requires(post): /usr/sbin/
Should be %{_sbindir} really, it's not a blocker though as you've used /usr/sbin
throughout.
Needs work
%files
all the %{_bindir} files can be globbed
%{_bindir}/cy*
You don't have a %files devel (that I can see) yet you have the subpackage
defined in the spec.
Good
Everything else!
No dupes in the rpms build
The software works
Spec file complies with the packaging guidelines
Permissions correctly set
rpmlint clean
mock builds fine (i386)
Has fallback if selinux is not available/enabled
md5sums correspond
Consistent use of macros throughout
Fix the needs work section and I'm happy.
--
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 189093] Review Request: mono-debugger
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: mono-debugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189093 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 17:30 EST --- Created an attachment (id=135088) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=135088action=view) New spec file Sorry had to put the new spec file here, but I can't seem to upload at the moment -- 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 203190] Review Request: netlabel_tools
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: netlabel_tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203190 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||t.com) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 17:35 EST --- NEEDSWORK: - home_base_url is used exactly once. Why not just use it in Source0? - No URL tag - glibc-kernheaders package doesn't exist anymore. The new package name is kernel-headers. Kernel-headers provides glibc-kernheaders, but might as well use the new name. - Description starts with a space - setup should have -q flag for quiet. - Package does not build currently: INFO: entering directory libnetlabel/ ... CC netlabel_init.o In file included from netlabel_init.c:39: /builddir/build/BUILD/netlabel_tools-0.16/include/linux/netlabel.h:42:1: warning: NLMSG_HDRLEN redefined In file included from netlabel_init.c:38: /usr/include/linux/netlink.h:74:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition In file included from netlabel_init.c:39: /builddir/build/BUILD/netlabel_tools-0.16/include/linux/netlabel.h:45: error: redefinition of 'struct nlattr' In file included from netlabel_init.c:39: /builddir/build/BUILD/netlabel_tools-0.16/include/linux/netlabel.h:64:1: warning: NLA_HDRLEN redefined In file included from netlabel_init.c:38: /usr/include/linux/netlink.h:131:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition make[1]: *** [netlabel_init.o] Error 1 make: *** [libnetlabel] Error 2 -- 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 189093] Review Request: mono-debugger
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: mono-debugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189093 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 17:41 EST --- Created an attachment (id=135090) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=135090action=view) monodebug-configure patch -- 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 203662] Review Request: dx - Open source version of IBM's Visualization Data Explorer
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: dx - Open source version of IBM's Visualization Data Explorer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203662 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 17:42 EST --- build fails memory.c:69:23: error: linux/sys.h: No such file or directory -- 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 198830] Review Request: libmodelfile - library for accessing WorldForge model files
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: libmodelfile - library for accessing WorldForge model files Alias: libmodelfile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198830 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 17:44 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) MUST - I could not get source package from Source URL, I had to use: http://dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/worldforge/libmodelfile-0.1.92.tar.gz (not sure why) But Source0 should be updated accordingly I've had mixed results using the various different forms of SF download URLs. It all depends on which mirror you happen to hit when you download the file. - Have you tested this in FC4? If you plan to support FC4 please test, BuildRequires might be different (might need xorg-x11-devel or something) I don't plan to support FC4 or FC5 for any of the WorldForge packages. -- 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 169974] Qalculate - A multi-purpose desktop calculator for GNU/Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Qalculate - A multi-purpose desktop calculator for GNU/Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169974 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 18:21 EST --- Maybe this shouldn't block Bug #170296? -- 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 168574] Review Request: perl-Convert-ASN1
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-Convert-ASN1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168574 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 18:22 EST --- Perhaps this shouldn't block Bug #168607? -- 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 166504] Review Request: python-numarry - Python array manipulation and computational library
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: python-numarry - Python array manipulation and computational library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166504 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 18:24 EST --- Perhaps this shouldn't block Bug #166503? -- 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 168607] Review Request: perl-Convert-PEM
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-Convert-PEM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168607 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|168574 | -- 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 177249] Review Request: jrtplib
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: jrtplib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 18:59 EST --- What is happening to that request? There seems to be nothing in owners.list and in repo? -- 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 175127] Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files
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: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175127 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 19:01 EST --- What is happening to that request? There seems to be nothing in owners.list and in repo? -- 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 204416] New: Review Request: libtelepathy - library to ease writing of telepathy clients
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=204416 Summary: Review Request: libtelepathy - library to ease writing of telepathy clients 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://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/libtelepathy.spec SRPM URL: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/libtelepathy-0.0.31-1.src.rpm Description: The Telepathy project aims to provide a unified framework for all forms of real time conversations, including instant messaging, IRC, voice calls and video calls. It uses the DBus messaging system to provide a simple interface for client applications, allowing them to quickly benefit from Telepathy's functionality. libtelepathy is a glib library to ease writing telepathy clients. -- 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 204417] New: Review Request: telepathy-gabble - A Jabber/XMPP connection manager
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=204417 Summary: Review Request: telepathy-gabble - A Jabber/XMPP connection manager 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://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-gabble.spec SRPM URL: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-gabble-0.3.1-1.src.rpm Description: The Telepathy project aims to provide a unified framework for all forms of real time conversations, including instant messaging, IRC, voice calls and video calls. It uses the DBus messaging system to provide a simple interface for client applications, allowing them to quickly benefit from Telepathy's functionality. telepathy-gabble is a Jabber/XMPP connection manager, that handles single and multi-user chats and voice calls. -- 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 182254] Review Request: SS5
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: SS5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 19:11 EST --- (In reply to comment #40) 1) I read the steps about Import of complete src.rpm packages (it's my case), so I ask you to check how I want to proceed: It is not a complete src.rpm packages, it is an update of a package allready in the cvs repository. * My package is named ss5 (ss5-3.5.9-1.src.rpm) and is under Devel/FC-4/Fc-5 branch; * I am releasing new version of ss5 (ss5-3.6.1-1.src.rpm), so: export CVSROOT=:ext:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/extras export CVS_RSH=ssh cvs co ss5 No need to do that a ... b ./cvs-import.sh -b FC-5 -m ss5 updated to 3.6.1-1 ~/rpmbuild/SRPM/ss5- 3.6.1-1.src.rpm That's not the recommended way. The recommended way is to make new-sources FILES=new-tarball.tgz modify specfile cvs commit (this should commit the change in sources). As I said above it is covered in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq -- 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 204421] New: Review Request: kdetv - KDE application for watching TV
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=204421 Summary: Review Request: kdetv - KDE application for watching TV 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://dribble.org.uk/reviews/kdetv.spec SRPM URL: http://dribble.org.uk/reviews/kdetv-0.8.9-1.src.rpm Description: kdetv is a KDE application that allows you to watch television on your GNU/Linux box running KDE. You probably know it as QtVision, the completely rewritten version of KWinTV. Note: rpmlint warnings about dangling symlinks can be ignored, as they point to files in another package. I also think the warnings about devel files in non devel package can also be ignored because KDE often seems to requite the .so and .la files (although I may be wrong :) ) -- 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 204423] New: Review Request: libstroke - A stroke interface library
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=204423 Summary: Review Request: libstroke - A stroke interface library 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://chitlesh.googlepages.com/libstroke.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.googlepages.com/libstroke-0.5.1-6.src.rpm Description: LibStroke is a stroke interface library. Strokes are motions of the mouse that can be interpreted by a program as a command. -- 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 197649] Review Request: gnustep-make - GNUstep makefile 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: gnustep-make - GNUstep makefile package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197649
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 19:56 EST ---
Thanks for the review!
About 1.
1. package meets naming and packaging guidelines, however, I'd like to see
some
reasoning why /usr/libexec/gnustep is used instead of %{_libdir}/gnustep and,
similarly, %{_datadir}/gnustep/Libraries instead of
%{_libdir}/gnustep/Libraries
libexec is chosen because the parts placed in there are called by parts of
gnustep-make, e.g. which_lib. The choice about FHS'izing gnustep-make is a bit
arbitrary since upstream hasn't yet properly addressed this, but most parts are
derived from mail exchanges between gnustep-make authors and ogo authors.
datadir instead of libdir is chosen because there is nothing arch-dependent in
there.
About 4.
4. build root NOT correct, should be:
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
This is the preferred buildroot which is not a must-buildroot. This issue was
brought up some time ago in the packaging group and consensus was mostly, that
if it works it passes.
--
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 177249] Review Request: jrtplib
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: jrtplib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177249 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 20:42 EST --- Thanks for reminding me! Imported and built for FC-6. -- 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 177249] Review Request: jrtplib
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: jrtplib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- 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 204210] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-W3CDTF - Parse and format W3CDTF datetime strings
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-DateTime-Format-W3CDTF - Parse and format W3CDTF datetime strings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204210 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 20:49 EST --- Imported into CVS, branches created, and builds done. -- 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 165779] Review Request: kasumi
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: kasumi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165779 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 20:57 EST --- I'm sorry for a bit confusing package request. - Firstly, I requested to import Kasumi into Extras. That time, SCIM is just a package of Extras. - Later, SCIM was moved into Core. That time, Kasumi has not yet been reviewed so that it's just imported into Core. There is no need for importing it into Extras anymore. - I have to close this post, but I've forgot to. That's my fault, I'm sorry. -- 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 165689] Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid
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: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165689 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 22:03 EST --- I had hoped that someone actually using this in K12LTSP would confirm that it works exactly as they are used to. The upstream K12LTSP is not a drop-in replacement for the K12LTSP version. Unfortunately, it seems that K12LTSP lacks a development community and relies too heavily on Eric Harrison to just hand them a solution. I cannot prioritize analyzing this myself, and holding it indefinitely doesn't seem to be a good solution either, so let's just let it publish and see if anybody screams. It will need to be fixed after the fact then. -- 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 165689] Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid
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: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165689 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 22:24 EST --- ACK - will build in mock to reconfirm that it builds, then push it to FE 5/devel normally. -- 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 189004] Review Request: irsim
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: irsim https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |201449 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-28 22:56 EST --- Closing. -- 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 204439] New: Review Request: perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI - Asynchronous non-blocking DBI calls in POE made simple
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=204439 Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI - Asynchronous non-blocking DBI calls in POE made simple Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/POE-Component-SimpleDBI/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI-1.12-1.fc5.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI.spec Description: This module works its magic by creating a new session with POE, then spawning off a child process to do the heavy lifting. That way, your main POE process can continue servicing other clients. Queries are put into a queue, and processed one at a time. -- 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 204439] Review Request: perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI - Asynchronous non-blocking DBI calls in POE made simple
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-SimpleDBI - Asynchronous non-blocking DBI calls in POE made simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||163776 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 166317] Review Request: perl-X11-Protocol
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-X11-Protocol https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166317 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-29 01:38 EST --- Reopening bug to fix assignee. -- 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
