[Bug 231267] Review Request: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict
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: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231267 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: stardict- |Review Request: stardict-dic |dic-zh_CN - Simplified |- dictionaries for StarDict |Chinese(zh_CN) dictionaries | |for StarDict| Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 02:36 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPM. + source files match upstream. 0349198b9dfcecd9a0f505512bb21d8b stardict-cdict-big5-2.4.2.tar.bz2 68e539f362de416490b78fed97aba780 stardict-cdict-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 80b13d05bd5e975c35afcf4a13113673 stardict-cedict-big5-2.4.2.tar.bz2 d8db9bdbf0dd4856d03e04d3f73d9c5a stardict-cedict-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 f164dcb24b1084e1cfa2b1cb63d590e6 stardict-dictd_www.dict.org_wn-2.4.2.tar.bz2 109c2308393a9bde37413cd1305e1256 stardict-dic-zh_CN-2.4.2.tar.bz2 0aa46b7d589a01663c3fb465152db85d stardict-edict-2.4.2.tar.bz2 e0f60d6acc4e3df6784805816b2e136f stardict-jmdict-en-ja-2.4.2.tar.bz2 2c574aef86a5d7bab45395d7e8ee7f6b stardict-jmdict-ja-en-2.4.2.tar.bz2 50b9423fa578988b5b0544c5b663058a stardict-langdao-ce-big5-2.4.2.tar.bz2 8e9700798a0ffeed23207b7cf2592246 stardict-langdao-ce-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 61ceeec1b056a171645af723d3e956fe stardict-langdao-ec-big5-2.4.2.tar.bz2 41a71f5b3952709746dd7e52cf155b8b stardict-langdao-ec-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 096f25252d2809191ff4fea041364841 stardict-mueller7-2.4.2.tar.bz2 e54da1d0759ce59f8fbddff7979e9300 stardict-oxford-big5-2.4.2.tar.bz2 c175f9bcb88e7513380ad05b291a8a03 stardict-oxford-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 4467d7941f9388f0e01ee3025c400b5c stardict-stardict1.3-2.4.2.tar.bz2 745727367e22ab9740256ceaf16cb83d stardict-xdict-ce-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 364bcecc126d6d8560728dc487ea9eaf stardict-xdict-ec-gb-2.4.2.tar.bz2 + 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 NOT included in package. + %doc is small so no need of -doc subpackage. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains content. + no static libraries. + no .pc files are present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 231267] Review Request: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict
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: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231267 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 02:48 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: stardict-dic Short Description: Dictionaries for StarDict Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: F-7 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 245160] Review Request: fann - A fast artificial neural network library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fann - A fast artificial neural network library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245160 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 02:56 EST --- Thanks a lot. I've fixed the issues. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245173] Review Request: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python 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: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245173 [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 on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216322] Review Request: tailor - VCS repository conversion tool
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: tailor - VCS repository conversion tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216322 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 04:30 EST --- Pong -- 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 245173] Review Request: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python 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: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245173 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 04:38 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPM. + source files match upstream. 3a3ff0204cbf872f6f99c83376d662d0 Babel-0.8.tar.bz2 + 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 small so no need of -doc subpackage. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains content. + no static libraries. + no .pc files are present. + no -devel but python-babel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. + followed python package guidelines. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226562] Merge Review: xkeyboard-config
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: xkeyboard-config https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226562 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://freedesktop.org/wiki/ ||Software/XKeyboardConfig --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 06:07 EST --- New URL: http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/XKeyboardConfig BTW. Any progress here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226421] Merge Review: slib
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: slib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226421 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 05:58 EST --- Fixed in slib-3a4-2.fc8. Thanks for the 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 243831] Review Request: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix
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: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243831 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 05:38 EST --- SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pvrabec/rpms/rsyslog-1.13.4-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 243831] Review Request: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix
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: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243831 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 06:51 EST --- To keep you busy, I just released a new version: http://download.adiscon.com/rsyslog/rsyslog-1.13.5.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 225671] Merge Review: curl
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: curl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225671
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 07:02 EST ---
None of the remaining patches touch autotools input files, so running aclocal
etc. is no longer needed.
The make install command can be simplified down to this:
make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INSTALL=%{__install} -p install
That might also get rid of the rpmlint warning from the SRPM about mixed use of
spaces and tabs.
The configure option for the CA bundle needs to be specified without reference
to %{buildroot}, because the packaged /usr/bin/curl-config has a reference to
the buildroot in it as things stand.
Please standardize on either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT; either is fine but
don't mix both in the same spec.
The packaged libcurl.pc has a Libs.private: that references -L/usr/lib64 (in the
64-bit version); I'm not sure if that's a problem but I prefer to get rid of
refences to standard library directories by adding a quick sed after running the
configure script:
# Remove -L options for standard library directories
sed -i -e 's,-L/usr/lib ,,g;s,-L/usr/lib64
,,g;s,-L/usr/lib$,,g;s,-L/usr/lib64$,,g' \
Makefile libcurl.pc
Perhaps docs/CONTRIBUTE could be added to the devel package?
P.S. It's Paul Howarth, not Paul Horwath...
--
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 227669] Review Request: ppl - A modern C++ library providing numerical abstractions
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: ppl - A modern C++ library providing numerical abstractions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227669 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 07:45 EST --- I am sorry for the delay. I am currently traveling and busy preparing and giving talks. I will be back on July 1st: from that date I will start again working on this issue. -- 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 243831] Review Request: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix
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: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243831 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 07:36 EST --- thnx. Rainer ;-), SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pvrabec/rpms/rsyslog-1.13.5-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 230762] Review Request: xawtv - TV applications for video4linux compliant devices
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: xawtv - TV applications for video4linux compliant devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230762 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 07:30 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: xawtv Short Description: TV applications for video4linux compliant devices Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6 F-7 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 243831] Review Request: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix
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: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243831 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 07:59 EST --- OK, the package seems fine for Fedora and confirms to guidelines. rpmlint output is basically the same as in comment #29 which is OK too. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245120] Review Request: libgsasl - includes support for the SASL framework
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: libgsasl - includes support for the SASL framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245120 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: libgsasl - |Review Request: libgsasl - |includes support for the|includes support for the |SASL framework |SASL framework CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 08:23 EST --- The summary could be better in my opinion, something like Summary: GNU Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) library or simply Summary: GNU SASL library rpmlint gives: W: libgsasl mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 7) I see only one real issue, the timestamp for the header files are no kept. I think it should be solved by doing something along: make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL='install -p' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245173] Review Request: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python 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: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245173 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 08:22 EST --- Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: babel Short Description: Tools for internationalizing Python applications Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: devel F-7 FC-6 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 227074] Review Request: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java
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: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227074 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 09:38 EST --- Matt? -- 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 227074] Review Request: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java
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: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227074 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:03 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: jrexx Short Description: Automaton based regluar expression API for Java Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229180] Review Request: texlive-texmf - Architecture independent parts of the TeX formatting system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf - Architecture independent parts of the TeX formatting system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229180 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:07 EST --- I just installed the texlive* packages (see complete list below) on F7, hoping to try them out on some of my LaTeX projects. At my first attempt, pdflatex aborted: $ pdflatex pgh-pm-perl-and-r.ltx This is pdfTeXk, Version 3.141592-1.40.3 (Web2C 7.5.6) %-line parsing enabled. kpathsea: Running mktexfmt pdflatex.fmt I can't find the format file `pdflatex.fmt'! $ Is there a dependency or perhaps a bit of %post magic that is missing from the specs? Packages installed: texlive-texmf-dvips-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-dvips-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-dviutils-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-texmf-common-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-texmf-afm-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-texmf-latex-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-latex-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-afm-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-texmf-2007-0.3.fc8 texlive-fonts-2007-0.3.fc8 P.S. Thanks for packaging TeX Live! Judging from the specs, it couldn't have been easy. -- 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 227103] Review Request: plexus-interactivity-1.0-0.a5.2jpp - Plexus Interactivity Handler Component
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: plexus-interactivity-1.0-0.a5.2jpp - Plexus Interactivity Handler Component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227103 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version||1.0-0.1.a5.2jpp.2.fc7 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:08 EST --- Forgot to close this bug from a while ago. This package is already in Fedora 7 -- 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 188138] Review Request: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon
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: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188138 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226551] Merge Review: xchat
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: xchat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226551 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:15 EST --- I know, the guidelines contradict themselves... If upstream uses vendor_id, leave it intact, otherwise use fedora as vendor_id. It is important that vendor_id stay constant for the life of a package. Now which is it? And what's the point of having merge reviews if we decide to keep existing packages the way they are, anyway? But whatever, I'm just going to install it with --vendor= and wait for the bug reports about not honoring the first of the 2 contradictory lines coming in... :-( -- 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 226551] Merge Review: xchat
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: xchat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226551 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:41 EST --- The .desktop file name is bug-for-bug-compatible now: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-commits/2007-June/msg04167.html Successfully built for Rawhide. -- 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 226551] Merge Review: xchat
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: xchat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226551 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:57 EST --- imo, life of package probably should say life of package in each branch/Fedora-release. Clear as mud? -- 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 227074] Review Request: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java
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: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227074 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:01 EST --- This was one of the packages that we thought was needed for maven2, but we later determined it wasn't required at this time. This package is no longer needed for maven at this time, since it has been reviewed and passed, I am setting the cvs 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 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:04 EST ---
I have uploaded updated packages now:
http://0pointer.de/public/rpms/nss-mdns/
(In reply to comment #37)
Hi,
It doesn't build on x86_64:
File not found by glob: /var/tmp/nss-mdns-0.10-1-buildroot/lib64/*
I believe I fixed this now, but actually cannot test this because I have no
64bit system around. Please try the updated package.
(In reply to comment #38)
The files are being installed into /lib on x86_64 instead of /lib64. The
simple
fix is to simply pass --libdir=/%{_lib} instead of --libdir=/lib.
Done. (See above)
I note you're not using the %{?dist} tag. There's certainly no requirement
that
you do so, but I always ping folks to make sure they understand the issues
that
crop up when you don't use it.
Nope. I do not understand the issues. I just left in there what Bastien
originally put in there. (Blame the frenchies!) Please enlighten me about the
implications!
I added the dist tag stuff now, just in case.
You need fine-grained dependencies; the package doesn't just require perl, it
needs it there to run its post script. So you need:
Requires(post): perl
Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig
I fixed that now and added fine-grained deps for post, preun, postun. For perl,
ldconfig and /bin/sh. (does depending on /bin/sh make any real sense or is it
superfluous because it is such a basic tool anyway?)
You can also drop the Requires: perl bit, unless the package actually needs
perl
in order to run normally.
Unless /etc/nsswitch.conf is patched nss-mdns is entirely useless. You cannot
run it manually, it just sits there and takes up some disk space. Thus I would
argue that depending on perl during installation does make a lot of sense.
I also added a depends on avahi, given that Avahi is required to be installed to
make nss-mdns any useful.
X license field says GPL but the LICENSE file says LGPL
Fixed.
X final provides and requires missing some dependencies; see above.
libnss_mdns.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns4.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns4.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns4_minimal.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns4_minimal.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns6.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns6.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns6_minimal.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns6_minimal.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
nss-mdns = 0.10-1
=
/bin/sh
/sbin/ldconfig
perl
I don't understand this entirely, but I think I fixed this with the fine-grained
dependencies, haven't I?
X shared libraries are present; ldconfig is called as necessary but
dependency
on ldconfig in %post is not present.
Fixed.
X scriptlets present are OK, but the dependencies are off.
I don't really understand this either, but this is fixed as well I think, by the
fine-grained deps stuff.
BTW, how does one generate that review report you posted? That's not rpmlint
output, is it?
Please review again!
--
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 226551] Merge Review: xchat
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: xchat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226551 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 11:04 EST --- IMHO fixing this sort of things is really what new releases are for. I don't think bug-for-bug compatibility is a good idea. I've also seen other packages changing the vendor name before. But it's back to the wrong name now in 2.8.2-12.fc8. -- 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 244374] Review Request: xulrunner - XUL Runner
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: xulrunner - XUL Runner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 11:10 EST --- Fix nspr. Simple. Talk to kengert. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245342] New: Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries
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=245342 Summary: Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries Product: Fedora Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/dcantrel/RPMS/perl-Gnome2/perl-Gnome2.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/dcantrel/RPMS/perl-Gnome2/perl-Gnome2-1.041-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: This module allows you to interface with the GNOME libraries. It follows the C API closely, so the GNOME library documentation provides all of the library details. Fedora currently has a number of the other perl-Gnome2-* packages, but not the actual perl-Gnome2 package. The reason I'd personally like this package added is so I can submit my GPRS Easy Connect package for inclusion review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226551] Merge Review: xchat
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: xchat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226551 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 11:00 EST --- (In reply to comment #14) I know, the guidelines contradict themselves... If upstream uses vendor_id, leave it intact, otherwise use fedora as vendor_id. This rule refer to *NEW* packages in Fedora. It is important that vendor_id stay constant for the life of a package. Now which is it? If the package is already in Fedora you cannot change the vendor, which is the case with xchat. -- 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 233850] Review Request: freepops - POP3 interface to webmails
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: freepops - POP3 interface to webmails https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233850 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG OtherBugsDependingO|177841 |201449 nThis|| Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |o-laurita.info) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 12:18 EST --- Once close. If someone want to import this package into Fedora, please file a new bug report, thank you! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221084] Review Request: dkms - Dynamic Kernel Module Support
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: dkms - Dynamic Kernel Module Support https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221084 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221084] Review Request: dkms - Dynamic Kernel Module Support
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: dkms - Dynamic Kernel Module Support https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221084 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 12:28 EST --- no longer blocks FE-NEW. -- 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 240243] Review Request: gpsdrive - A GPS based navigation tool
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: gpsdrive - A GPS based navigation tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 12:39 EST --- Excellent. Thanks for the review, and sorry it took so long to finish up the last issues. Package Name: gpsdrive Short Description: A GPS based navigation tool Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: F-7 FC-6 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 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
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: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [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 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
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: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163779 | nThis|| 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 233850] Review Request: freepops - POP3 interface to webmails
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: freepops - POP3 interface to webmails https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233850 [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 241403] Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241403 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 13:01 EST --- Spec URL: http://www.silfreed.net/download/repo/packages/qgis/qgis.spec SRPM URL: http://www.silfreed.net/download/repo/packages/qgis/qgis-0.8.1-1.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Jun 19 2007 Douglas E. Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.8.1-1 - updating version - removed BuildRequires: python-devel due to lack of PyQt4 bindings - updated build for use of cmake instead of autotools - added patch for setting WORKDIR in settings.pro file - added patch for fixing install path of man pages - updated library names $ rpmlint RPMS/qgis-*0.8.1-1*.rpm SRPMS/qgis-0.8.1-1.src.rpm E: qgis invalid-soname /usr/lib/libqgis_core.so libqgis_core.so W: qgis-devel no-documentation W: qgis-grass no-documentation E: qgis-grass invalid-soname /usr/lib/libqgisgrass.so libqgisgrass.so W: qgis-theme-nkids no-documentation -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210790] Review Request: dar - Collection of scripts for making/restoring CD/DVD backups
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: dar - Collection of scripts for making/restoring CD/DVD backups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [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 169345] Review Request: SEC - Simple Event Correlator
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: SEC - Simple Event Correlator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169345 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [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 241403] Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic
Information System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241403
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 13:52 EST ---
(In reply to comment #20)
* rpm call
- Interal rpm call in rpmbuild is forbidden because it is
considered as dangerous due to some reason.
Please change the following to the proper way.
---
%define grass_ver %(rpm -q --queryformat %{VERSION} grass)
---
Sorry; what would the proper way be? The cmake script tries to lookup the
grass library in the wrong locations and I need to tell it that the library
lives under a directory like /usr/lib/grass-6.2.1.
* non-sover libraries with providing -devel subpackage.
Upstream does not provide a sover with their library but their program links
against it:
$ ldd /usr/bin/qgis | grep libqgis_core.so
libqgis_core.so = /usr/lib/libqgis_core.so (0x03099000)
$ ldd /usr/lib/qgis/libgrass*.so | grep libqgisgrass.so
libqgisgrass.so = /usr/lib/libqgisgrass.so (0x00673000)
libqgisgrass.so = /usr/lib/libqgisgrass.so (0x002fc000)
Should I still move these files into the -devel package and then have the main
packages end up with a Requires on the -devel package, or do I need to work
with upstream to add a sover to these libraries?
--
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 241403] Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic
Information System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241403
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 13:31 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=157631)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157631action=view)
mock build log of qgis 0.8.1-1 on Fedora devel i386
Some remarks
* Mockbuild
- Mockbuild failed on Fedora devel i386.
At least cmake is missing for BR (I can't do a formal review
until mockbuild passes)
* cmake
- For cmake, please check:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/cmake
Especially, please make the build log more verbose.
* rpm call
- Interal rpm call in rpmbuild is forbidden because it is
considered as dangerous due to some reason.
Please change the following to the proper way.
---
%define grass_ver %(rpm -q --queryformat %{VERSION} grass)
---
* non-sover libraries with providing -devel subpackage.
- Shipping non-sover libraries with providing -devel subpackage
is unwilling because:
Shipping -devel package means that the libraries %{_libdir}/*.so
is allowed to be linked from other packages. So some binaries in
other package may link to the libraries in this package.
Then ABI of the libraries in this package may change in the future.
At this time, as these libraries have no sover, rpm has no clue of
whether ABI of these libraries changed, so rpm allows the upgrading
of this package. However, this upgrade surely stop the other binaries
linking to these libraries from working any more.
* Using %{_builddir}
-
find %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/doc -name '.cvsignore' -exec %{__rm} -f {}
';'
-
- %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version} can be simply replaced with .
as at this point the working directory is
%{_builddir}/%{name}-%{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 225915] Merge Review: iscsi-initiator-utils
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: iscsi-initiator-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 14:10 EST --- Very nice. Thanks a lot. I was trying to fix up the fc7 rpm, but when I ran rpmlint I did not see the statically built warning. I also just got stuck on some other warning I see you fixed. Do you just check in the patch or do I? Also /sbin/iscsistart is statically linked because it is used in the initramfs like how nash or some of the lvm tools are. If we are doing dymaically linked tools in the initramfs then I can fix that up. If not how do I get 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 245357] Review Request: libopensync-plugin-syncml - plugin for using syncml with opensync
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: libopensync-plugin-syncml - plugin for using syncml with opensync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245357 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 14:22 EST --- This is not an official review as I am not sponsored yet. - Summary: - * Does not build in mock, missing BuildRequires: pkgconfig * Changelog needs some work * %doc contains empty files - Details: - * FIX - Mock : Built on F-7 (x86) Did not build: (needs BuildRequires: pkgconfig checking for pkg-config... no checking for PACKAGE... configure: error: The pkg-config script could not be found or is too old. Make sure it is in your PATH or set the PKG_CONFIG environment variable to the full path to pkg-config. OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - License field in spec matches OK - License is GPL OK - License match packaging policy licenses allowed OK - License file is included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources SHOULD match upstream md5sum: 8ffa3233ad28fb3ead324d88573f0c38 libopensync-plugin-syncml-0.22.tar.bz2 OK - Package has correct buildroot. OK - BuildRequires are not redundant. FIX - %build and %install stages are correct and work. Does not build OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - No large doc files not in a -doc package OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. FIX - Package %files %doc looks good %doc contains empty files - README and NEWS ? - Package doesn't own any directories that other packages own. FIX - Changelog section is correct. either needs a - infront of it or move it up to the above line * NA - Does not contain any .la libtool archives NA - .desktop file installed correctly ? - Should function as described. OK - Should package latest version --- Rpmlint output: --- * SRPM OK - silent * RPM ?- rpm didn't build -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192606] Review Request: yafc: yet another ftp client
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: yafc: yet another ftp client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192606 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 14:26 EST --- Might as well get all of my good packages into EPEL: Package Change Request == Package Name: yafc 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 245357] Review Request: libopensync-plugin-syncml - plugin for using syncml with opensync
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: libopensync-plugin-syncml - plugin for using syncml with opensync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245357 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 14:27 EST --- One more thing I forgot to put above: The spec includes a -devel package, but does not contain a %files devel section. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 240699] Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system Alias: perl-MogileFS-Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240699 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 14:29 EST --- No luck: [EMAIL PROTECTED] common]$ ./cvs-import.sh ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/perl-MogileFS-Client-1.07-2.fc7.src.rpm Checking out module: 'perl-MogileFS-Client' Unpacking source package: perl-MogileFS-Client-1.07-2.fc7.src.rpm... L MogileFS-Client-1.07.tar.gz A perl-MogileFS-Client.spec Checking : MogileFS-Client-1.07.tar.gz on https://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/repo/pkgs/upload.cgi... Module 'perl-MogileFS-client' does not exist! make: *** [upload] Error 1 ERROR: Uploading the source tarballs failed! -- 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 225915] Merge Review: iscsi-initiator-utils
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: iscsi-initiator-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:04 EST --- I can check in the changes on the F7 and/or devel branch if you remove the pkg.acl file or add me to it. I do not know about initramfs but if it is necessary FESCO will probably approve. I can point FESCO to this ticket so that they can discuss this on their next meeting. -- 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 245385] New: Review Request: avant-window-navigator - Composted Window Dock
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=245385 Summary: Review Request: avant-window-navigator - Composted Window Dock Product: Fedora Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~katzj/awn/avant-window-navigator.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~katzj/awn/avant-window-navigator-0.1.1-1.20070622svn.src.rpm Description: Avant Window Navgator (Awn) is a dock-like bar which sits at the bottom of the screen (in all its composited-goodness) tracking open windows. Note: this is a post-release snapshot since there hasn't been a release in a while. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 236521] Review Request: nspluginwrapper - A compatibility layer for Mozilla/Firefox plugins
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: nspluginwrapper - A compatibility layer for Mozilla/Firefox plugins Alias: nspluginwrapper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236521 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:13 EST --- Last I heard from caillon, he's working with stransky on a better solution to some of these problems including: - Do not move plugins installed by other RPMS. -- 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 240699] Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system Alias: perl-MogileFS-Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240699 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:13 EST --- Sorry about that. Forgot to clean up the owners list as well. Can you try again now? Also, note that the wrong name might be in your Makefile, you should be able to change that with the initial checkin. -- 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 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #39) [dist tag] Nope. I do not understand the issues. I just left in there what Bastien originally put in there. (Blame the frenchies!) Please enlighten me about the implications! Sure. First, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag for an overview. The basic problem is that without the dist tag you have to keep separate specs for each supported release, since you cannot have the same version-release string on two different branches. Usually new packagers not using the dist tag import and build for rawhide, then try to import and build for a release branch and get a nice useless error about trying to apply the same tag to multiple branches when they go to build. I fixed that now and added fine-grained deps for post, preun, postun. For perl, ldconfig and /bin/sh. (does depending on /bin/sh make any real sense or is it superfluous because it is such a basic tool anyway?) Actually rpmbuild will automatically give you the proper dependency for the shell needed to run a scriptlet. So unless you use -p you get an automatic depdency on /bin/sh, and if you have %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig then you get the necessary Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig automatically. So basically the two dependencies on /bin/sh you have, along with the Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig, are not really needed but aren't really harmful either. Unless /etc/nsswitch.conf is patched nss-mdns is entirely useless. You cannot run it manually, it just sits there and takes up some disk space. Yes, I know, but you need it at package install/removal time to run the scriptlets, not at any other time. The difference is essentially academic in any case. The way you have things listed currently is OK. I also added a depends on avahi, given that Avahi is required to be installed to make nss-mdns any useful. OK. I don't understand this entirely, but I think I fixed this with the fine-grained dependencies, haven't I? I always list out the full set of dependencies a package has, noting any bad ones and mentioning any deficiencies I notice. BTW, how does one generate that review report you posted? That's not rpmlint output, is it? Only three lines of that are rpmlint output; the rest is my usual review template which I paste in and edit accordingly for each package I review. At this point I think things are OK; you have some unnecessary dependencies as mentioned above, but they're merely redundant and don't hurt anything. You can remove them when you check in if you like. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225915] Merge Review: iscsi-initiator-utils
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: iscsi-initiator-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:18 EST --- Dynamically linked in the initramfs is fine for F7 and later. -- 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 231267] Review Request: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict
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: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231267 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:23 EST --- Are these dictionaries useful without the 'stardict' 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 230762] Review Request: xawtv - TV applications for video4linux compliant devices
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: xawtv - TV applications for video4linux compliant devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230762 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:27 EST --- cvs 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 245173] Review Request: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python 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: babel - Tools for internationalizing Python applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245173 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:31 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 227074] Review Request: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java
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: jrexx-1.1.1-3jpp - Automaton based regluar expression API for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227074 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:32 EST --- cvs 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 243187] Review Request: edac-utils - user space utilities for EDAC subsystem
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: edac-utils - user space utilities for EDAC subsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243187 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:39 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: edac-utils Short Description: userspace utilities for EDAC drivers Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6, FC-7 -- 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 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
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: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:39 EST --- cvs 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 244374] Review Request: xulrunner - XUL Runner
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: xulrunner - XUL Runner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244374 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:42 EST --- I built it with internal nspr for now (OLPC-2 branch only). I will work with kengert to get this fixed as soon as possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244368] Review Request: hulahop - A pygtk widget for embedding mozilla
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: hulahop - A pygtk widget for embedding mozilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244368 Bug 244368 depends on bug 244374, which changed state. Bug 244374 Summary: Review Request: xulrunner - XUL Runner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244374 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE 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 192606] Review Request: yafc: yet another ftp client
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: yafc: yet another ftp client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192606 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:50 EST --- cvs 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 243187] Review Request: edac-utils - user space utilities for EDAC subsystem
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: edac-utils - user space utilities for EDAC subsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243187 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:55 EST --- cvs 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 232399] Review Request: gscan2pdf - A GUI for producing a multipage PDF from a scan
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: gscan2pdf - A GUI for producing a multipage PDF from a scan https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232399 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:57 EST --- cvs 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 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX
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: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 16:00 EST --- Spec: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/7/SRPMS/asterisk-1.4.5-10.fc7.spec SRPM: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/7/SRPMS/asterisk-1.4.5-10.fc7.src.rpm * Thu Jun 21 2007 Jeffrey C. Ollie [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 1.4.5-10 - Build the IMAP and ODBC storage options of voicemail and split voicemail out into subpackages. - Apply patch so that the system UW IMAP libray can be linked against. - Patch modules.conf.sample so that alternal voicemail modules don't get loaded simultaneously. - Link against system GSM library rather than internal copy. - Patch the Makefile so that it doesn't add redundant/wrong compiler options. - Force building with the standard RPM optimization flags. - Install the Asterisk MIB in a location that net-snmp can find it. - Only package docs in the main package that are relevant and that haven't been packaged by a subpackage. - Other minor cleanups. -- 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 239892] Review Request: eclipse-checkstyle - a checkstyle plugin for eclipse
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: eclipse-checkstyle - a checkstyle plugin for eclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239892 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 16:10 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: eclipse-checkstyle 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 239165] Review Request: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP packets
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: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP packets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239165 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 16:16 EST --- Created an attachment (id=157646) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157646action=view) Specfile patch Sindre, The patch makes the following changes to the specfile: * re-introduces some of the documentation files ( tcptraceroute.1.html tcptraceroute.lsm examples.txt ) * adds two perl scripts to the documentation files list ( tcptra-testsuite.pl traceroute.cgi ) Note: the execution bit is cleared in the %setup section * removes several white spaces jpo -- 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 240699] Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Client library for the MogileFS distributed file system Alias: perl-MogileFS-Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240699 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 16:24 EST --- Ah, thanks Kevin, it's working now. Sorry for the trouble. -- 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 235203] Review Request: kdebluetooth: The KDE Bluetooth Framework (take/2)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdebluetooth: The KDE Bluetooth Framework (take/2) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235203 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 16:43 EST --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686$ rpmlint -i kdebluetooth-1.0-0.22.beta3.i686.rpm W: kdebluetooth no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. W: kdebluetooth incoherent-version-in-changelog 1-0.0-23.beta3 1.0-0.22.beta3 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. Other than that the rpm seems to work find except that it installs menu items in a few different places which is kind of annoying. The only issues I've had are ones that appear to be with the application itself. -- 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 241403] Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qgis - A user friendly Open Source Geographic Information System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241403 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 17:18 EST --- Until I figure out what to do about the missing-sover and the rpm call, I've built new packages to hopefully get the package building in mock. They should be up on my website soon (probably by 17:30 EST), and will be: Spec URL: http://www.silfreed.net/download/repo/packages/qgis/qgis.spec SRPM URL: http://www.silfreed.net/download/repo/packages/qgis/qgis-0.8.1-2.src.rpm %changelog * Fri Jun 22 2007 Douglas E. Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.8.1-2 - added BuildRequires: cmake - updated build to use cmake macro and make verbose $ rpmlint RPMS/qgis-*0.8.1-2* SRPMS/qgis-0.8.1-2.src.rpm E: qgis invalid-soname /usr/lib/libqgis_core.so libqgis_core.so W: qgis-devel no-documentation W: qgis-grass no-documentation E: qgis-grass invalid-soname /usr/lib/libqgisgrass.so libqgisgrass.so W: qgis-theme-nkids no-documentation -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 181997] Review Request: gpc - The GNU Pascal compiler
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: gpc - The GNU Pascal compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181997 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 17:58 EST --- Created an attachment (id=157661) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157661action=view) Patch for spec file The attached patch fixes a few cosmetic issues with the spec file. Will continue to test the package some more... -- 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 235501] Review Request: jsdoc - Produces javadoc-style documentation from JavaScript sourcefiles
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: jsdoc - Produces javadoc-style documentation from JavaScript sourcefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235501 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 18:21 EST --- Should be fixed. New packages are at http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/progs/rpms/, specifically SRPM is http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/progs/rpms/JSDoc-1.10.2-3.fc7.src.rpm and SPEC file http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/progs/rpms/JSDoc.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 245419] New: Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Utilities for MogileFS
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=245419 Summary: Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Client - Utilities for MogileFS Product: Fedora Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://rubenkerkhof.com/packages/perl-MogileFS-Utils.spec SRPM URL: http://rubenkerkhof.com/packages/perl-MogileFS-Utils-2.11-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: Utilities for the MogileFS distributed storage system Depends on perl-MogileFS-Client, which is in rawhide, and will be in F-7 updates soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 18:53 EST --- Fixed spec file and SRPM http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/olpc-utils.spec http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/olpc-utils-0.14-1.fc7.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245419] Review Request: perl-MogileFS-Utils - Utilities for MogileFS
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-MogileFS-Utils - Utilities for MogileFS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245419 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: perl- |Review Request: perl- |MogileFS-Client - Utilities |MogileFS-Utils - Utilities |for MogileFS|for MogileFS -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not
packaged anywhere else
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 18:59 EST ---
still needs to own %dir %{_datadir}/olpc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245120] Review Request: libgsasl - includes support for the SASL framework
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: libgsasl - includes support for the SASL framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245120 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:01 EST --- * rpmlint is silent * free software, l icense included * follow packaging and naming guidelines * match upstream d118c5a5a9333411ec3d6cb7973b314a libgsasl-0.2.18.tar.gz * sane provides Provides: libgsasl.so.7 * right %files section * .so in -devel, no .la, no static lib APPROVED I will sponsor you, just apply. That way you can rebuild libgsasl against libntml, and msmtp against libgsasl. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not
packaged anywhere else
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:04 EST ---
rpmlint olpc-utils-0.14-1.fc7.src.rpm
E: olpc-utils no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
W: olpc-utils no-%clean-section
please add
%clean
rm -rf %{buildroot}
and then post the new .src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:07 EST --- Fixed http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/olpc-utils.spec http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/olpc-utils-0.14-1.fc7.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not
packaged anywhere else
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:11 EST ---
Just for future refrence you should up the release after each change.
rpmlint passes
upstream tarball uses configure and respects %configure optflags
upstream tarball respects DISTDIR
%{_libdir}/olpc
and %{_libdir}/olpc/keycodes owned by package
All issues have been cleaned up
APPROVED - please continue with CVS access request
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 222475] Review Request: sofia-sip - Sofia SIP User-Agent library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sofia-sip - Sofia SIP User-Agent library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222475 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:14 EST --- I hate seeing these tickets sit around for so long This builds fine for me in mock on x86_64 with current rawhide. However, there are a number of rpmlint complaints: W: sofia-sip-glib no-documentation Not a big deal. E: sofia-sip-utils binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/sip-date ['/usr/lib64'] E: sofia-sip-utils binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/sip-options ['/usr/lib64'] E: sofia-sip-utils binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/sip-dig ['/usr/lib64'] These are problematic and will need to be fixed. W: sofia-sip unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua.so.0.5.0 /lib64/libdl.so.2 W: sofia-sip unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua.so.0.5.0 /lib64/libz.so.1 W: sofia-sip-glib unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 /lib64/libssl.so.6 W: sofia-sip-glib unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 /lib64/libcrypto.so.6 W: sofia-sip-glib unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 /lib64/libdl.so.2 W: sofia-sip-glib unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 /lib64/libz.so.1 W: sofia-sip-glib unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 /lib64/librt.so.1 It's nice if these can be made to go away, but they're merely inefficiencies. W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_timers W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_threadsafe W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_getmsgs W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_getmsgs_from W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_start_shared W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_wait W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_log_default W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_log_global W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_wait_mask W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_root_create_with_port W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_timer_next_expires W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_root_magic W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_root_gsource W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_init W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_perror W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_wait W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_home_deinit W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_vllog W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_send W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_deinit W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_base_port_getmsgs W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_port_prefer W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_timer_expire W: sofia-sip-glib undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libsofia-sip-ua-glib.so.3.0.0 su_wait_destroy There are situations where these are OK but usually it indicates some sort of error. I also noticed that your -devel package includes .pc files but has no dependency on pkgconfig. -- 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 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not
packaged anywhere else
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:16 EST ---
git failed:
$ git clone git://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-utils; cd olpc-utils
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/dumas/tmp/olpc-utils/.git/
fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly
fetch-pack from 'git://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-utils' failed.
But why don't you use
http://people.freedesktop.org/~johnp/olpc-utils-0.14.tar.bz2
on the line
make%{?_smp_mflags}
there should be a space:
config.status: creating Makefile
+ make-j3
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.37841: line 50: make-j3: command not found
erreur: Mauvais status de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.37841 (%build)
rpmlint shows that a %clean section is missing:
E: olpc-utils no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
W: olpc-utils no-%clean-section
Since John is reading this, the following compiler warning should
be solved:
olpc-bios-sig.c: In function 'main':
olpc-bios-sig.c:35: warning: implicit declaration of function 'open'
olpc-bios-sig.c:48: warning: implicit declaration of function 'close'
olpc-bios-sig.c:58: warning: implicit declaration of function 'isdigit'
Looking at the man pages, seems to be missing:
#include sys/types.h
#include sys/stat.h
#include fcntl.h
#include unistd.h
#include ctype.h
Also for John, unless I am wrong configure.ac is missing, this is
not acceptable...
There is also certainly a bug somewhere (but I cannot read the
missing configure.ac...):
configure: Configuring dbench
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #19) All issues have been cleaned up APPROVED - please continue with CVS access request John, I think you should also wait for somebody else to approve, the package is still not in acceptable shape. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 243631] Review Request: msmtp - an SMTP client
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: msmtp - an SMTP client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243631 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:30 EST --- * Fri Jun 22 2007 Nikolay Vladimirov [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 1.4.12-4 - not using alternatives Spec URL: http://ns.bgtld.net/build/msmtp.spec SRPM URL: http://ns.bgtld.net/build/msmtp-1.4.12-4.fc7.src.rpm also source file in the srpm is with the correct timestamp. The main problem with msmtp is that if it replaces sendmail it brakes all local mail deliveries(that's not good). That includes syslog. Msmtp just takes the mail from a MUA and relays it to a smtp server it doesn't really transports it; the only destination is an smtp server. So there must be a configuration file with account for every user(that uses mail) and an smtp server to send mail to. Else sending mail just doesn't work. So if there is entry for msmtp in alternatives and it's selected as system mta. All mail delivery will be broken unless there is a valid configuration file(must be written by the sys admin). So as I said before the risk of breaking things if msmtp is system mta is big. I'll leave the provides for sendmail because of mutt and remove the use of alternatives it's just not useful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 240497] Review Request: R-multtest 1.14.0 - Resampling-based multiple hypothesis testing library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: R-multtest 1.14.0 - Resampling-based multiple hypothesis testing library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240497 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||240500 -- 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 240500] Review Request: R-Biobase 1.14.0 - Functions that are needed by many other packages
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: R-Biobase 1.14.0 - Functions that are needed by many other packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||240497 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 241082] Review Request: R-tkWidgets-1.14.0 - Widgets to provide user interfaces
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: R-tkWidgets-1.14.0 - Widgets to provide user interfaces https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241082 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 240500] Review Request: R-Biobase 1.14.0 - Functions that are needed by many other packages
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: R-Biobase 1.14.0 - Functions that are needed by many other packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||241082 -- 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 241082] Review Request: R-tkWidgets-1.14.0 - Widgets to provide user interfaces
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: R-tkWidgets-1.14.0 - Widgets to provide user interfaces https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241082 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||240500 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 243631] Review Request: msmtp - an SMTP client
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: msmtp - an SMTP client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243631
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:47 EST ---
(In reply to comment #23)
The main problem with msmtp is that if it replaces sendmail it brakes all
local
mail deliveries(that's not good). That includes syslog. Msmtp just takes the
mail from a MUA and relays it to a smtp server it doesn't really transports
it;
the only destination is an smtp server. So there must be a configuration file
with account for every user(that uses mail) and an smtp server to send mail
to.
Else sending mail just doesn't work. So if there is entry for msmtp in
alternatives and it's selected as system mta. All mail delivery will be broken
unless there is a valid configuration file(must be written by the sys admin).
So as I said before the risk of breaking things if msmtp is system mta is
big.
I mostly agree with you.
I'll leave the provides for sendmail because of mutt and remove the use of
alternatives it's just not useful.
That seems wrong to me: it is not right to provide a file which
is not part of the package. A package Requiring %{_sbindir}/sendmail
will fail with msmtp installed.
Maybe the right solution would be to have mutt require something
else than %{_sbindir}/sendmail, for example MTA, drop the alternative
use in esmtp and ssmtp too and have those packages Provides MTA
(and have all the real mta also provide MTA).
That way we would have the following meaning for the Provides:
smtpdaemon: a smtp daemon listens on the smtp port
%{_sbindir}/sendmail: the file is part of the package (using alternative)
and can be used to send mail
MTA: the package provides a command that can be used to send mail
mutt would require MTA, most packages would requires %{_sbindir}/sendmail
and packages that send to localhost:smtp will require smtpdaemon (like
mlmmj bugzilla amavisd fetchmail)
Manuel, do you have an opinion?
--
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 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:53 EST --- The tarball regeneration still doesn't work for me, when I do it I don't get the same files than what is in the tarball, I get only: COPYING Makefile olpc-bios-sig.c olpc-evdev setolpckeys.c -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 19:37 EST --- 1) The git instructions in the spec file has been fixed. J5 put that freedesktop tarball as a temporary place to build the spec and is not really the upstream url. 2) make file space has been fixed 3)% clean has already been fixed in the previous spec file http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/olpc-utils.spec http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/olpc-utils-0.14-2.fc7.src.rpm Rest of the feedback is directed to J5 since they are source code fixes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244908] Review Request: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else
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: olpc-utils - various utilities used by OLPC but not packaged anywhere else https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244908 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 20:03 EST --- As the spec file indicates you can consider the source within the SRPM as authoritative for now till J5 gets to fix rest of upstream issues. Is there any problems specific to the spec file left? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244123] Review Request: cvsplot - Collect statistics from CVS controlled 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: cvsplot - Collect statistics from CVS controlled files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244123 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Flag||needinfo? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 20:49 EST --- package build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 233946] Review Request: secondlife - The Second Life client
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: secondlife - The Second Life client Alias: secondlife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233946 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 21:30 EST --- Argh, the server blew its power supply, looks like it finally got fixed. I've got a 1.17.0.12 package to upload once I get home. -- 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 231267] Review Request: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict
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: stardict-dic - dictionaries for StarDict https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231267 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 22:05 EST --- No, only stardict can load them. Although some other program such as sdcv, ktranslator support this format too. -- 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 245431] Review Request: libtommath - portable number theoretic multiple-precision integer library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtommath - portable number theoretic multiple-precision integer library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245431 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||245432 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245432] Review Request: libtomcrypt - comprehensive, portable cryptographic toolkit
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: libtomcrypt - comprehensive, portable cryptographic toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||245431 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-23 01:39 EST --- LibTomCrypt has a build and runtime dependency on libtommath which is also a new package request (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245431). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245431] New: Review Request: libtommath - portable number theoretic multiple-precision integer library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245431 Summary: Review Request: libtommath - portable number theoretic multiple-precision integer library Product: Fedora Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://jeremy.hinegardner.org/fedora/libtommath.spec SRPM URL: http://jeremy.hinegardner.org/fedora/libtommath-0.41-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: LibTomMath is a free open source portable number theoretic multiple-precision integer library written entirely in C. (phew!) The library is designed to provide a simple to work with API that provides fairly efficient routines that build out of the box without configuration. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
