[Bug 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis 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: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 02:22 EST --- Great news! } Here are new packages, I had to disable smp_mflags (it builds out of order on } SMP) Is this a bug on our end? If so, we'd be happy to try to fix it if you can describe the problem in a bit more detail. -- 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 237416] Review Request: Berusky - 2D logic game based on an ancient puzzle Sokoban.
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: Berusky - 2D logic game based on an ancient puzzle Sokoban. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237416 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 03:45 EST --- Hm, all files are there (at http://people.redhat.com/stransky/berusky/): [ ] berusky-1.1-1.src.rpm 23-Apr-2007 15:28 402k RPM package file [ ] berusky-data-1.0-2.src.rpm 23-Apr-2007 15:28 932k RPM package file [ ] berusky-data.spec 23-Apr-2007 15:27 2k [ ] berusky.spec 23-Apr-2007 15:27 1k or do you mean the files at http://www.anakreon.cz/download/berusky/tar.gz/? -- 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 174290] HDate-applet is an applet to show the hebrew date (calendar) using the libhdate library and the gnome-2.0 graphics library.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: HDate-applet is an applet to show the hebrew date (calendar) using the libhdate library and the gnome-2.0 graphics library. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174290 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 04:45 EST --- Again ping? -- 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 231758] Review Request: perl-Workflow - Simple, flexible system to implement workflows
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-Workflow - Simple, flexible system to implement workflows Alias: perl-Workflow https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231758 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 05:13 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url e9c25c357b0e2a62fa91493b818a538f Workflow-0.26.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test t/action...ok t/action_field.ok t/action_null..ok t/base.ok t/conditionok t/condition_evaluate...ok t/config...Use of uninitialized value in numeric eq (==) at t/config.t line 41. ok t/context..ok t/exceptionok t/factory..ok t/factory_subclass.ok t/history..ok t/persister_dbiUse of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/DBD/Mock.pm line 531. ok t/persister_dbi_extra_data.ok t/persister_file...ok t/persister_random_id..ok t/persister_spops..skipped all skipped: SPOPS not installed t/persister_uuid...skipped all skipped: Data::UUID not installed t/stateok t/validatorok t/validator_has_required_field.ok t/validator_in_enumerated_type.ok t/validator_matches_date_formatok t/workflow.Use of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/DBD/Mock.pm line 531. ok All tests successful, 2 tests skipped. Files=24, Tests=192, 10 wallclock secs ( 7.04 cusr + 0.79 csys = 7.83 CPU) + Provides: perl(Workflow) perl(Workflow::Action) perl(Workflow::Action::InputField) perl(Workflow::Action::Null) perl(Workflow::Base) perl(Workflow::Condition) perl(Workflow::Condition::Evaluate) perl(Workflow::Condition::HasUser) perl(Workflow::Config) perl(Workflow::Config::Perl) perl(Workflow::Config::XML) perl(Workflow::Context) perl(Workflow::Exception) perl(Workflow::Factory) perl(Workflow::History) perl(Workflow::Persister) perl(Workflow::Persister::DBI) perl(Workflow::Persister::DBI::AutoGeneratedId) perl(Workflow::Persister::DBI::ExtraData) perl(Workflow::Persister::DBI::SequenceId) perl(Workflow::Persister::File) perl(Workflow::Persister::RandomId) perl(Workflow::Persister::SPOPS) perl(Workflow::Persister::UUID) perl(Workflow::State) perl(Workflow::Validator) perl(Workflow::Validator::HasRequiredField) perl(Workflow::Validator::InEnumeratedType) perl(Workflow::Validator::MatchesDateFormat) + Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(DBI) perl(Data::Dumper) perl(Data::UUID) perl(DateTime) perl(DateTime::Format::Strptime) perl(Exception::Class) perl(File::Spec::Functions) perl(Log::Log4perl) perl(Safe) perl(Workflow) perl(Workflow::Action) perl(Workflow::Action::InputField) perl(Workflow::Condition) perl(Workflow::Condition::Evaluate) perl(Workflow::Config) perl(Workflow::Context) perl(Workflow::Exception) perl(Workflow::Factory) perl(Workflow::History) perl(Workflow::Persister) perl(Workflow::Persister::DBI::AutoGeneratedId) perl(Workflow::Persister::DBI::SequenceId) perl(Workflow::Persister::RandomId) perl(Workflow::State) perl(Workflow::Validator) perl(Workflow::Validator::HasRequiredField) perl(XML::Simple) perl(base) perl(constant) perl(strict) 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
[Bug 203520] Review Request: evolution-brutus
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: evolution-brutus Alias: evolution-brutus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203520 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 06:03 EST --- Brian, anything bad happened to you? Anything that I can help with?? -- 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 174286] hocr is a set of Hebrew character recognition utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: hocr is a set of Hebrew character recognition utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174286 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |om) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 06:31 EST --- I'm sorry for the delay, but it will take me more time to supply the spec file. If someone else is interested with packaging this - be my guest. -- 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 174290] HDate-applet is an applet to show the hebrew date (calendar) using the libhdate library and the gnome-2.0 graphics library.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: HDate-applet is an applet to show the hebrew date (calendar) using the libhdate library and the gnome-2.0 graphics library. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174290 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |om) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 06:31 EST --- I'm sorry for the delay, but it will take me more time to supply the spec file. If someone else is interested with packaging this - be my guest. -- 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 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis 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: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 07:12 EST --- I'm still here... ;) All checks are OK under FC5 i386 ! Questions: It seems that libunwind is not strongly required. I've successfully built google-perftools under FC5/i386 without it at all. Since there is no libunwind in FC5 and FC6 distros, and since the trying to build it under FC5/i386 was failed (due to failed checks), maybe drop this BR, or at least use this BR for particular arch (64) only? Patching of both Makefile.am and Makefile.in files looks like not very good way, AFAIK in such a case we should patch *.am and run some autotools to update *.in Are there some more elegant ways for adding of libstacktrace to link stage? Maybe some unique change is possible (i.e. common LIBS, or something in Makefile.am and autoconf etc.)? -- 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 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis 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: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-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 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis 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: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #122826|0 |1 is obsolete|| -- 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 229490] Review Request: pypar2 - graphical frontend to par2cmdline
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: pypar2 - graphical frontend to par2cmdline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229490 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo? | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 07:21 EST --- Yes, i'm on it. But i still have my problem : If i don't use patch, there isn't any menu entry for pypar2. I'll post my spec and srpm for version 1.4 with the problem tonight. -- 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 226389] Merge Review: sane-frontends
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: sane-frontends https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226389 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 07:45 EST --- I'm currently building sane-frontends-1.0.14-3.fc7 which should fix the problems found by rpmlint, please check. -- 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 226658] Merge Review: xsane
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: xsane https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226658 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 07:53 EST --- Sorry, I was a bit under water... I'm building xsane-0.994-3.fc7 right now which doesn't list the Application category for the desktop file anymore, please check. -- 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 07:54 EST --- ping? -- 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 08:01 EST --- pong. sure let me check what mock gives me -- 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 08:06 EST --- build.log showed me + desktop-file-install --vendor redhat --delete-original --dir /var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications /var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/hwbrowser.desktop /var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/redhat-hwbrowser.desktop: warning: boolean key Terminal has value 0, boolean values should be false or true, although 0 and 1 are allowed in this field for backwards compatibility /var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/redhat-hwbrowser.desktop: warning: The 'Application' category is not defined by the desktop entry specification. Please use one of AudioVideo, Audio, Video, Development, Education, Game, Graphics, Network, Office, Settings, System, Utility instead ALSO rpmlint reported on SRPM W: hwbrowser macro-in-%changelog _datadir Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in possibly rewriting history on subsequent package revisions and generally odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'. And on RPM W: hwbrowser incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.31 0.31-1.fc7 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. E: hwbrowser non-executable-script /usr/share/hwbrowser/DeviceList.py 0644 This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. Kindly correct those things and update the 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 225447] Review Request: php-magpierss - MagpieRSS is an RSS parser written in PHP
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: php-magpierss - MagpieRSS is an RSS parser written in PHP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225447 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Bug 225447 depends on bug 225434, which changed state. Bug 225434 Summary: php include path should have /usr/share/php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225434 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:07 EST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
build.log showed me
+ desktop-file-install --vendor redhat --delete-original --dir
/var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications
/var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/hwbrowser.desktop
/var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/redhat-hwbrowser.desktop:
warning: boolean key Terminal has value 0, boolean values should be
false
or true, although 0 and 1 are allowed in this field for backwards
compatibility
fixed
/var/tmp/hwbrowser-0.31-1.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/redhat-hwbrowser.desktop:
warning: The 'Application' category is not defined by the desktop entry
specification. Please use one of AudioVideo, Audio, Video,
Development,
Education, Game, Graphics, Network, Office, Settings, System,
Utility instead
fixed
ALSO
rpmlint reported on SRPM
W: hwbrowser macro-in-%changelog _datadir
Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead
to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that
affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in
possibly rewriting history on subsequent package revisions and generally
odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros
in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'.
fixed
And on RPM
W: hwbrowser incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.31 0.31-1.fc7
The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not
coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package.
this will stay, as we're upstream for hwbrowser, thus releases will almost
always be 1{?dist}
E: hwbrowser non-executable-script /usr/share/hwbrowser/DeviceList.py 0644
This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for
executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If
the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits,
otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere.
fixed
Kindly correct those things and update the package.
hwbrowser-0.32 is building right now.
--
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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled
internet applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:09 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Created an attachment (id=153185)
--
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153185action=view)
[edit]
rpmlint log for 4.10.1-2 (with gdal-config issue modified)
Well, actually I don't know about PHP at all!! So I don't know
how to use this...
However as this is heavily related with grass, gdal.. so I will
review this.
Well, this software package provedes both cgi-bin shell like interpreter and
a nice php plugin, loaded and registered by apache server.
Its easy we should have the .so registered in apach , thats all. this .so
library exports for apache all necesary bindings, and provide a higher level
programing functions in php specialized for GIS.
---
%{__sed} -i.libs -e 's|`\$GDAL_CONFIG --dep-libs`||' configure
---
applied.
* License
- Well, while most files are licensed under MIT, one file is
licensed under BSD.
---
strptime.c
---
erghh ...
author fault, i should notify him.
Currently I do not disagree with writing BSD for the license
of this.
Then after the fix above is applied..
* rpmlint - attached.
Summary:
* Fix improper permissions.
fixed all.
Next for spec file:
A. Description entry
- Well, while there is a php releated subpackage which requires
php, does main package also require php?
yes must require php, and especialy php-gd, it use some functions from php-gd
Please explain because currently I don't know how to use this
at all.
well, this mapserver.so extension have some external reference to php-gd
extension so its mandatory to have php-gd at all.
I removed php since php-gd itself olso require php
- Do perl/python subpackage have no dependency for main package?
no, its just a wrapper.
- Requires: python/Requires: perl are redundant.
removed.
- Current Fedora packaging policy requires that BuildRoot includes
release number (according to the section BuildRoot tag of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines )
updated.
- By the way, there seems to be java/ruby binding. Would you try
to enable this?
ok i try, i notice down on my TODO.
B. Prep/Build/Install stage
- not a big problem, however fedora compilation flags is passed
twice for main and python subdirectory build (not a blocker)
- If this support parallel make, then please use. Otherwise
add some comments in spec file.
ouch, i will workaround put on my TODO as non-trivial.
C. Scripts
- While no shared libraries are installed by main package, why
does main package call ldconfig?
removed.
D. File entry
- README.CONFIGURE is for people who want to build this software
by themselves and so this is not needed for fedora rpm.
not included for now.
- Vera related fonts under tests/ should not be installed because
these fonts are provides system-wide by bitstream-vera-fonts
not included for now.
- (I say this although I know *very little* about httpd)
Please consider to move files under /var/www to %{_datadir}
update my TODO for now.
Check: the section Web Applications of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
- It seems that mapscript/php3/README should be added as %doc
to php subpackage.
- On my system %{_libdir}/php4/ is not owned by any package.
If I own it than i break ownage for other php modules.
I saw no other php modules olso own it, this is a
place where all php modules go to be picked up by apache.
Its owned _default_ by php-common !
Please check if this directory is correct.
- %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/mapscript/ is not owned by any package.
now its owned.
--
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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled
internet applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:10 EST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
One more comment:
Why do you exclude %{python_sitearch}/mapscript.py? ?
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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:11 EST --- I got 3 TODO for now, i proceed into, hope within hours i solve those lefting 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
[Bug 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:22 EST --- WRT to changelog entry: just use 0.31-1 (or 0.32-1, etc) and you'll make rpmlint happy. Even if you are upstream, maybe you'll decide that a minor change is not worth a version bump but just a release bump. -- 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:45 EST --- If you insist... I've added the release tag to the changelog entry in upstream CVS as a reminder, i.e. when there's a new version, rpmlint will be happy then (hopefully I won't forget it ;-). -- 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 235471] Review Request: perl-PDF-API2 - Perl module for creation and modification of PDF 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: perl-PDF-API2 - Perl module for creation and modification of PDF files Alias: perl-PDF-API2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235471 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) As to the fonts, they look perfectly fine. However, they may fall under the heading of content, and thus need a FESCo ack... If someone with a better feel of this sections than the guidelines could post a comment here, I'd much appreciate it. Since they are an integral (or are they?) part of the package, I wasn't so worried about whether they were OK or not, just if there was a better way to handle their inclusion. The package defaults to installing them with the perl package itself, but I was wondering if it should/could be broken up to install with regular fonts (I didn't try that). Opinions? -- 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 237416] Review Request: Berusky - 2D logic game based on an ancient puzzle Sokoban.
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: Berusky - 2D logic game based on an ancient puzzle Sokoban. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237416 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 09:59 EST --- I meant the files from comment #2 http://people.redhat.com/stransky/berusky/ -- 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 237373] Review Request: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor
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: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237373 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:05 EST --- Created an attachment (id=153352) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153352action=view) mcpp-manual.html.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 237373] Review Request: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor
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: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237373 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:07 EST --- Created an attachment (id=153353) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153353action=view) mcpp.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 237416] Review Request: Berusky - 2D logic game based on an ancient puzzle Sokoban.
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: Berusky - 2D logic game based on an ancient puzzle Sokoban. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237416 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:10 EST --- You're right. I've just updated the berusky-1.1-1.src.rpm and berusky.spec, there was an old spec file there. -- 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 203520] Review Request: evolution-brutus
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: evolution-brutus Alias: evolution-brutus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203520 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |.net) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:11 EST --- Sorry, I was out of town this weekend. I'll have some time this afternoon to work on 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 237373] Review Request: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor
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: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237373 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:12 EST --- Please provide a new _full_ srpm so that everyone can check your new srpm easily... -- 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 237373] Review Request: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor
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: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237373 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:33 EST --- Created an attachment (id=153354) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153354action=view) mcpp-2.6.3-3.src.rpm Hello Tasaka-san, Thank you very much for the thorough and kind review! I have rewritten the spec file and created a patch file. As for %check, current mcpp of compiler-independent-build has no automatic testing routine. Though mcpp has a series of automatic testing testcases, it is for GCC-specific-build of mcpp. I want to write a testing routine for mcpp of compiler-independent-build too, in the future version. -- 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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:50 EST --- Spec URL: http://openrisc.rdsor.ro/mapserver.spec SRPM URL: http://openrisc.rdsor.ro/mapserver-4.10.1-3.src.rpm solved all blockers. ruby is not enabled becouse i wasnt able to build it, java is now enabled. -- 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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:52 EST --- http://openrisc.rdsor.ro/mapserver-4.10.1-3.fc7.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 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis 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: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:54 EST --- (In reply to comment #34) Great news! } Here are new packages, I had to disable smp_mflags (it builds out of order on } SMP) Is this a bug on our end? If so, we'd be happy to try to fix it if you can describe the problem in a bit more detail. Yeah, this is a bug on your end (a minor one). Try building with make -j3 (doesn't need to be on an SMP system). On my end, the libraries don't finish building before the binaries try to link, and thus, it fails. -- 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 231758] Review Request: perl-Workflow - Simple, flexible system to implement workflows
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-Workflow - Simple, flexible system to implement workflows Alias: perl-Workflow https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231758 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:56 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Workflow Short Description: Simple, flexible system to implement workflows Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5, FC-6, devel InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 231758] Review Request: perl-Workflow - Simple, flexible system to implement workflows
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-Workflow - Simple, flexible system to implement workflows Alias: perl-Workflow https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231758 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- 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 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis 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: google-perftools: Very fast malloc performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 10:57 EST --- (In reply to comment #35) I'm still here... ;) All checks are OK under FC5 i386 ! Questions: It seems that libunwind is not strongly required. It is on x86_64, and since it doesn't hurt us to have it everywhere, I made it a generic BuildRequires. I've successfully built google-perftools under FC5/i386 without it at all. Since there is no libunwind in FC5 and FC6 distros, and since the trying to build it under FC5/i386 was failed (due to failed checks), maybe drop this BR, or at least use this BR for particular arch (64) only? More likely, I'll just remove that BR for FC-5/6 and mark it i386 only for those dists. Patching of both Makefile.am and Makefile.in files looks like not very good way, AFAIK in such a case we should patch *.am and run some autotools to update *.in Ehh... I'm trying to avoid dragging in autotools. I patched both the .am and the .in so that it would be clean to anyone who did run autotools off the source. -- 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 237041] Review Request: perl-JSON - Parse and convert to JSON (JavaScript Object Notation)
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-JSON - Parse and convert to JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) Alias: perl-JSON https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237041 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 11:09 EST --- Update to 1.11. SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-JSON-1.11-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-JSON.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 237373] Review Request: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor
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: mcpp - Alternative C/C++ preprocessor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237373
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 11:15 EST ---
For -3:
* Directory ownership
- %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-%{version} is not owned
by any package and this package should own the
directory.
Well, then:
-
NOTE: Before being sponsored:
This package will be accepted with another few work.
But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate)
must sponsor you.
Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other
submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally.
For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you)
are required to show that you have an understanding
of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described
on :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored
Usually there are two ways to show this.
A. submit other review requests with enough quality.
B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request
(at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do
a formal review)
When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other
person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report
so that I can check your comments or review request.
Fedora Extras package review requests which are waiting for someone to
review can be checked on:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=runnamednamedcmd=mtasaka-review-noone
NOTE: FE-NEW blockers are now not complete.
Review guidelines are described mainly on:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets
--
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 203520] Review Request: evolution-brutus
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: evolution-brutus Alias: evolution-brutus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203520 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #151890|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 12:31 EST --- Created an attachment (id=153359) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153359action=view) Updated spec file -- 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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled
internet applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 12:49 EST ---
For -3:
* php module directory
- On my system %{_libdir}/php4/ is not owned by any package.
If I own it than i break ownage for other php modules.
I saw no other php modules olso own it, this is a
place where all php modules go to be picked up by apache.
Its owned _default_ by php-common !
- Still I don't know why this is happening
* In your opinion it is the bug of php side that %{_libdir}/php4
is not owned by any package?
* And what does php4 means? This 4 is of no relation with
php version (currently 5.2.1)?
* And as far as I saw some php modules rpms, php modules (which
I think so) are installed under %{_libdir}/php/modules/, and this
directory (%{_libdir}/php/modules) is owned by php-common.
* perl .so module permission
- Well, actually you fixed the permission by:
--
%attr(0755,root,root) %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/mapscript/*
--
However, this method leaves the following message which
I don't know I can ignore:
--
+ /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-compress
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-static-archive /usr/bin/strip
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-comment-note /usr/bin/strip /usr/bin/objdump
/usr/bin/strip: unable to copy file
'/var/tmp/mapserver-4.10.1-3.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/mapscript/mapscript.so'
reason: Permission denied
+ /usr/lib/rpm/brp-python-bytecompile
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-java-repack-jars
--
To avoid this, it seems that the permission of mapscript.so must
be changed to 0755 at the install stage, not by setting attr.
* documentation
--
%files
%defattr(-,root,root)
-%doc COMMITERS GD-COPYING HISTORY.TXT INSTALL
-%doc MIGRATION_GUIDE.TXT README README.CONFIGURE
+%doc COMMITERS GD-COPYING HISTORY.TXT
+%doc INSTALL MIGRATION_GUIDE.TXT
--
- While ReADME.CONFIGURE is not needed, IMO README should be
left as 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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled
internet applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 13:05 EST ---
* In your opinion it is the bug of php side that %{_libdir}/php4
is not owned by any package?
It _should be owned by:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/php
php-common-5.2.1-5
So i should _not_ own it !
* And what does php4 means? This 4 is of no relation with
SHIIT
Sorry, ok i should remove 4, and put all in
/usr/lib64/php/modules/
Seems thigs changed since a while ...
php version (currently 5.2.1)?
Ya right, sorry for confusion.
* And as far as I saw some php modules rpms, php modules (which
I think so) are installed under %{_libdir}/php/modules/, and this
directory (%{_libdir}/php/modules) is owned by php-common.
correct !
* perl .so module permission
- Well, actually you fixed the permission by:
--
%attr(0755,root,root) %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/mapscript/*
--
However, this method leaves the following message which
I don't know I can ignore:
--
+ /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-compress
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-static-archive /usr/bin/strip
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-comment-note /usr/bin/strip /usr/bin/objdump
/usr/bin/strip: unable to copy file
'/var/tmp/mapserver-4.10.1-3.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/mapscript/mapscript.so'
reason: Permission denied
+ /usr/lib/rpm/brp-python-bytecompile
+ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-java-repack-jars
--
To avoid this, it seems that the permission of mapscript.so must
be changed to 0755 at the install stage, not by setting attr.
* documentation
--
%files
%defattr(-,root,root)
-%doc COMMITERS GD-COPYING HISTORY.TXT INSTALL
-%doc MIGRATION_GUIDE.TXT README README.CONFIGURE
+%doc COMMITERS GD-COPYING HISTORY.TXT
+%doc INSTALL MIGRATION_GUIDE.TXT
--
- While ReADME.CONFIGURE is not needed, IMO README should be
left as documentation.
Yay, i did stupid F6 instead of F5 at a point.
Ok i fix all issues and upload things for tomorrow.
(head out for now in a rush)
--
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 229490] Review Request: pypar2 - graphical frontend to par2cmdline
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: pypar2 - graphical frontend to par2cmdline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229490 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:00 EST --- Created an attachment (id=153377) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153377action=view) spec file Maxime, here is the spec file with my modifications. Have a look and bump a release for approval. -- 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 221027] Review Request: LabPlot - Data Analysis and Visualization
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: LabPlot - Data Analysis and Visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221027 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |au) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:06 EST --- Updated Spec URL: http://tux.u-strasbg.fr/~chit/LabPlot/LabPlot.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 225929] Merge Review: jakarta-commons-fileupload
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: jakarta-commons-fileupload https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225929 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:12 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) ... * summary should be a short and concise description of the package X summary is basically just package name Jakarta Commons Fileupload Package Fixed ... * package should own all directories and files X package doesn't own /usr/share/java[doc], this package needs a requirement on jpackage-utils (owns those directories) Added * run rpmlint on the binary RPMs rpmlint /home/matt/topdir/RPMS/i386/jakarta-commons-fileupload-1.0-6jpp.2.i386.rpm W: jakarta-commons-fileupload non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java W: jakarta-commons-fileupload unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/gcj/jakarta-commons-fileupload/jakarta-commons-fileupload-1.0.jar.so X please fix the unstripped-binary-or-object warning. Hm... I don't get this warning, just the group one: [EMAIL PROTECTED] src]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/jakarta-commons-fileupload-1.0-6jpp.2.fc7.x86_64.rpm W: jakarta-commons-fileupload non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java Updated spec file and srpm at the same location. -- 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 203520] Review Request: evolution-brutus
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: evolution-brutus
Alias: evolution-brutus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203520
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:26 EST ---
Well, for 1.1.25.9-2:
* Requires
- For devel package, it seems that gpgme-devel, e2fsprogs-devel
are not needed.
Note: I usually check by:
A:
---
$ LANG=C grep 'include ' `rpm -ql evolution-brutus-devel` | grep -v Binary | sed
-e 's|^.*:||' | sed -e 's|^[ \t][ \t]*||' | sort | uniq
---
B:
---
$ rpm -ql evolution-brutus-devel | grep '/usr/lib/pkgconfig/.*.pc' | xargs cat |
grep Requires
---
= License is okay for all 263 files
* Removing documentation
---
# Don't bother to pack unnecessary docs.
rm -f %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-devel-%{version}/INSTALL
rm -f %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-devel-%{version}/building_from_source
---
- Just the following?
---
rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-devel-%{version}/
---
--
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 166008] Review Request: uw-imap - UW Server daemons for IMAP and POP
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: uw-imap - UW Server daemons for IMAP and POP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:41 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: uw-imap New Branches: EL-5 -- 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 221027] Review Request: LabPlot - Data Analysis and Visualization
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: LabPlot - Data Analysis and Visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221027 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:41 EST --- Please change release number correctly... Also please also upload a new srpm. -- 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 229490] Review Request: pypar2 - graphical frontend to par2cmdline
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: pypar2 - graphical frontend to par2cmdline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229490 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 14:57 EST --- OK! All is right now. SPEC : http://carron.maxime.free.fr/fedora/rpms/pypar2.spec Read it online : http://carron.maxime.free.fr/fedora/rpms/pypar2-1.4-1.spec.html SRPM : http://carron.maxime.free.fr/fedora/rpms/pypar2-1.4-1.src.rpm Thanks a lot for your fixes -- 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 232792] Review Request: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled internet 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: mapserver - Environment for building spatially-enabled
internet applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232792
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 15:08 EST ---
(In reply to comment #12)
* In your opinion it is the bug of php side that %{_libdir}/php4
is not owned by any package?
It _should be owned by:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/php
php-common-5.2.1-5
Note php4 vs php.
--
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 226276] Merge Review: perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226276
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 15:21 EST ---
The latest (5.8.8-16.3) fixes the issues described in comment #25 and comment
#26:
Now the perl-CPAN package Provides: cpan-version, and the %{libdir} issues
should be fixed.
--
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 203520] Review Request: evolution-brutus
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: evolution-brutus Alias: evolution-brutus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203520 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 15:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #95) Well, for 1.1.25.9-2: Any other blockers? Otherwise, your suggestions can be fixed when the package is imported into CVS since they're fairly minor. -- 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 210007] Review Request: libtune - standard API to access the kernel tunables
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: libtune - standard API to access the kernel tunables https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: libtune - |Review Request: libtune - |standard API to access the |standard API to access the |kernel tunables|kernel tunables -- 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 234791] Review Request: perl-Email-Send - Module for sending email
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-Email-Send - Module for sending email Alias: perl-Email-Send https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234791 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 16:13 EST --- New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-Email-Send.spec New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-Email-Send-2.185-2.fc7.src.rpm Fixes WARNING: LICENSE and adds missing BR. -- 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 234784] Review Request: perl-Email-Date - Find and format date headers
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-Email-Date - Find and format date headers Alias: perl-Email-Date https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234784 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 16:18 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Email-Date Short Description: Find and format date headers Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5 FC-6 InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 235189] Review Request: nautilus-python - Python bindings for Nautilus
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: nautilus-python - Python bindings for Nautilus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235189 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 16:44 EST --- Thank you for the review and the feedback! -- 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 235191] Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader
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: postr - Flickr uploader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235191 Bug 235191 depends on bug 235189, which changed state. Bug 235189 Summary: Review Request: nautilus-python - Python bindings for Nautilus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235189 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 237705] New: Review Request: xclip - Command line clipboard grabber
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=237705 Summary: Review Request: xclip - Command line clipboard grabber Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/xclip.spec SRPM URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/xclip-0.08-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: xclip is a command line utility that is designed to run on any system with an X11 implementation. It provides an interface to X selections (the clipboard) from the command line. It can read data from standard in or a file and place it in an X selection for pasting into other X applications. xclip can also print an X selection to standard out, which can then be redirected to a file or another program. -- 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 226276] Merge Review: perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226276
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 17:29 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=153388)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153388action=view)
x86_64 build fix for 16.3
The %{_libdir} issues actually became worse - the %exclude's were correct in
16.2 and the inclusions incorrect, but 16.3 made the %excludes incorrect too.
The attached patch fixes the build for me on FC6 x86_64, resulting packages
untested.
Provides: cpan-%{version} looks odd, was it meant to be Provides: cpan =
%{version}?
--
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 225248] Merge Review: ant
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: ant https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 18:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) Good: + Naming seems ok. + Tar ball matches with upstream. + Mock build works fine for FC6 and rawhide. Bad: - BR coreutils is not be included. BR coreutils removed. - warning from rpmlint ant-manual: rpmlint of ant-manual: W: ant-manual dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/ant-manual-1.6.5/manual/api /usr/share/javadoc/ant-1.6.5 W: ant-manual symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/doc/ant-manual-1.6.5/manual/api /usr/share/javadoc/ant-1.6.5 These are needed so that different versions of docs can be installed on the same machine. The symlink points to a macro, so it cannot be make relative. W: ant-manual file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/ant-manual-1.6.5/manual/tutorial-tasks-filesets-properties.zip This zip is taken directly from the source tar ball. - Errors/warnings on rpmlint ant: E: ant devel-dependency java-devel ant needed java-devel to run some of its tasks. W: ant non-standard-group Development/Build Tools The group warning is OK. W: ant incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.6.5-4jpp.2 0:1.6.5-4jpp.2.fc6 Fixed W: ant obsolete-not-provided ant-optional W: ant obsolete-not-provided ant-optional-full I tried adding these Provides, but then the main package conflicts with the sub-packages, so these were removed. E: ant useless-explicit-provides ant That Provides: allows subpackages not in Fedora to be installed from JPackage. Updates srpm and spec file at the same location. -- 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 226276] Merge Review: perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226276 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 18:12 EST --- argh, yes, I managed to get both 'fixes' exactly wrong, somehow. 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 237705] Review Request: xclip - Command line clipboard grabber
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: xclip - Command line clipboard grabber https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237705 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 18:47 EST --- I'll take a look, although I can't test a build in mock sorry. -- 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 220635] Review Request: livecd-tools - Tools for creating Live CD's
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: livecd-tools - Tools for creating Live CD's https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220635 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 18:59 EST --- Package fails review guidelines. A bug must be filed for any use of ExcludeArch, and placed on the appropriate ExcludeArch tracker bug for Extras. Please file an appropriate bug, outlining what needs to be done to fix the problem. Presumably it's as trivial as just making the output bootable with yaboot? -- 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 237705] Review Request: xclip - Command line clipboard grabber
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: xclip - Command line clipboard grabber
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237705
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 19:10 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Rpmlint output: empty on source, binary, debug rpm
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meet other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type:GPL
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is written in American English.
[x] Spec file for the package is legible.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: 2b20daab0523a2b4b2cab1f24887481556eadb8b
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: devel/x86_64
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
Arches excluded: -
Why: -
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[-] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:devel/x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:devel/x86_64
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] Latest version is packaged.
=== Issues ===
1. SMP_flags are not taken into account
Tom, please update the spec to honor SMP flags before uploading to CVS.
--
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 237381] Review Request: ruby-zoom - Ruby binding to ZOOM
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: ruby-zoom - Ruby binding to ZOOM Alias: ruby-zoom https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237381 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-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 237381] Review Request: ruby-zoom - Ruby binding to ZOOM
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: ruby-zoom - Ruby binding to ZOOM Alias: ruby-zoom https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237381 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 22:59 EST --- This is my first review attempt of a ruby package, so please, be kind -- I'm quite willing to be educated :) doc/ and README should be in %doc. Add these, and I'll approve. + source files match upstream: e38f664296b70b2d74962359f381cfb7 ruby-zoom-0.2.2.tar.gz e38f664296b70b2d74962359f381cfb7 ../ruby-zoom-0.2.2.tar.gz + package meets naming and versioning 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. (LGPL) License text included in package. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package installs properly + debuginfo package looks complete. + rpmlint is silent. final provides and requires are sane: ** ruby-zoom-0.2.2-1.fc6.x86_64.rpm == rpmlint == provides ruby(zoom) = 0.2.2-1.fc6 zoom.so()(64bit) ruby-zoom = 0.2.2-1.fc6 == requires libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libcrypt.so.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libexslt.so.0()(64bit) libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit) libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libnsl.so.1()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libruby.so.1.8()(64bit) libssl.so.6()(64bit) libwrap.so.0()(64bit) libxml2.so.2()(64bit) libxslt.so.1()(64bit) libyaz.so.2()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) ruby ruby(abi) = 1.8 ** ruby-zoom-debuginfo-0.2.2-1.fc6.x86_64.rpm == rpmlint == provides zoom.so.debug()(64bit) ruby-zoom-debuginfo = 0.2.2-1.fc6 == requires O %check is NOT present -- but there appear to be no tests + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. + 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. -- 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 23:34 EST --- Ok now rpmlint gave me W: hwbrowser incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.32 0.32-1.fc7 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-24 23:42 EST --- You just need to replace * Tue Apr 24 2007 Nils Philippsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 0.32 with * Tue Apr 24 2007 Nils Philippsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 0.32-1 and rpmlint will be silent then. I don't think its related with whether upstream is using release tag in tarball name or not. -- 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 237338] Review Request: perl-Net-DNS-SEC -- Perl support for DNSSEC -- SPONSOR NEEDED
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-DNS-SEC -- Perl support for DNSSEC -- SPONSOR NEEDED Alias: perl-Net-DNS-SEC https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237338 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||perl-Net-DNS-SEC -- 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 236539] Review Request: perl-Math-Vec - Perl Math::Vec module
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-Math-Vec - Perl Math::Vec module Alias: perl-Math-Vec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236539 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||perl-Math-Vec -- 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 237738] New: Review Request: perl-Data-Dump - Pretty printing of data structures
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=237738 Summary: Review Request: perl-Data-Dump - Pretty printing of data structures Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-Dump/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Data-Dump-1.08-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Data-Dump.spec Description: This module provides a single function called dump() that takes a list of values as its argument and produces a string as its result. The string contains Perl code that, when evaled, produces a deep copy of the original arguments. The string is formatted for easy reading. -- 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 237738] Review Request: perl-Data-Dump - Pretty printing of data structures
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-Data-Dump - Pretty printing of data structures Alias: perl-Data-Dump https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237738 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 00:31 EST --- This package is a prereq of the Catalyst framework. -- 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 237739] New: Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed
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=237739 Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/File-Modified/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified-0.07-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified.spec Description: The Modified module is intended as a simple method for programs to detect whether configuration files (or modules they rely on) have changed. There are currently two methods of change detection implemented, mtime and MD5. The MD5 method will fall back to use timestamps if the Digest::MD5 module cannot be loaded. -- 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 237739] Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed
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-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed Alias: perl-File-Modified https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237739 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||perl-File-Modified --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 00:43 EST --- This package is a prereq of the Catalyst framework. -- 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 212912] Review Request: php-pear-HTML-QuickForm - Class for creating, validating, processing HTML forms
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: php-pear-HTML-QuickForm - Class for creating, validating, processing HTML forms Alias: pear-HTML-QuickForm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212912 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 00:56 EST --- Branch Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-pear-HTML-QuickForm Short Description: Class for creating, validating, processing HTML forms Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: EL-5 InitialCC: -- 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 212915] Review Request: php-pear-HTML-Table - Class to easily design HTML tables
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: php-pear-HTML-Table - Class to easily design HTML tables Alias: pear-HTML-Table https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212915 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 00:57 EST --- Branch Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-pear-HTML-Table Short Description: Class to easily design HTML tables Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: EL-5 InitialCC: -- 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 237741] New: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Request-AsCGI - Setup a CGI enviroment from a HTTP::Request
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=237741 Summary: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Request-AsCGI - Setup a CGI enviroment from a HTTP::Request Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTTP-Request-AsCGI/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-HTTP-Request-AsCGI-0.5-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-HTTP-Request-AsCGI.spec Description: Provides a convenient way of setting up an CGI enviroment from a HTTP::Request. -- 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 212916] Review Request: php-pear-DB-DataObject-FormBuilder - Automatically build HTML_QuickForm objects
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: php-pear-DB-DataObject-FormBuilder - Automatically build HTML_QuickForm objects Alias: DataObj-FormBuilder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 00:58 EST --- Branch Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-pear-DB-DataObject-FormBuilder Short Description: Automatically build HTML_QuickForm objects Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: EL-5 InitialCC: -- 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 237742] New: Review Request: perl-Text-SimpleTable - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables
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=237742 Summary: Review Request: perl-Text-SimpleTable - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-SimpleTable/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Text-SimpleTable-0.03-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Text-SimpleTable.spec Description: Simple eyecandy ASCII tables, as seen in Catalyst. -- 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 237742] Review Request: perl-Text-SimpleTable - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables
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-Text-SimpleTable - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables Alias: Text-SimpleTable https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237742 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||Text-SimpleTable --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 01:16 EST --- This package is a prereq of the Catalyst framework. -- 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 235960] Review Request: perl-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures
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-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures Alias: perl-Data-Visitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 01:21 EST --- This package is a prereq of the Catalyst framework. -- 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 235954] Review Request: perl-Test-use-ok - Alternative to Test::More::use_ok
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-Test-use-ok - Alternative to Test::More::use_ok Alias: perl-Test-use-ok https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235954 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-25 01:21 EST --- This package is a prereq of the Catalyst framework. -- 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
