[Bug 230344] Review Request: bacula - Cross platform network backup for Linux, Unix, Mac and Windows.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bacula - Cross platform network backup for Linux, Unix, Mac and Windows. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230344 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 02:04 EST --- Looks good now. sha1sum matches upstream ef58c91243bd819e0ac278b91aeae16639d6c8ce bacula-2.0.3.tar.gz ef58c91243bd819e0ac278b91aeae16639d6c8ce bacula-2.0.3.tar.gz 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 249352] Review Request: popt - C library for parsing command line parameters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: popt - C library for parsing command line parameters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249352 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 02:15 EST --- Bill: Yes, the intent is to split it out, having a separate library with it's own versioning coming out of rpm package is a huge pita and I want to see this done in time for F8. But this needs to be carefully coordinated to avoid making a total mess as rpm is quite intimately married to popt, hold it for a moment, need to discuss this with Paul first. -- 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 02:36 EST --- as per comment 6 , I kept tbl2mim.awk script with 755 permissions -- 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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 02:35 EST --- Upstream released new version 1.1.3 Here are updated links Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/m17n/m17n-contrib.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/m17n/m17n-contrib-1.1.3-1.fc8.src.rpm But I got following rpmlint on binary m17n-contrib rpm E: m17n-contrib non-executable-script /usr/share/m17n/scripts/tbl2mim.awk 0644 This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. -- 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 247227] Review Request: nabi - hangul and hanja X input method
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nabi - hangul and hanja X input method Alias: nabi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247227 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:15 EST --- I am waiting for newer version of libhangul (0.18) to be built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 247227] Review Request: nabi - hangul and hanja X input method
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nabi - hangul and hanja X input method Alias: nabi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247227 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:17 EST --- Right probably nabi-0.18 requires libhangul-0.0.6 and the current version in fedora in 0.0.4. I asked the owner to update it. -- 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 249352] Review Request: popt - C library for parsing command line parameters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: popt - C library for parsing command line parameters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249352 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:21 EST --- Panu: Well, splitting popt out of rpm is not that huge problem as it currently looks like to you. Finally popt ever had it's own versioning (just read the popt changelog inside of the popt directory). -- 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:27 EST --- Now debuginfo rpm is correct. For 1.2.4-0.2: * License - Under which is the whole package of libgeotiff licensed ? Public domain or MIT? As far as I checked the source codes, many codes are under MIT (X). * pkgconfig .pc file - Currently pkg-config returns: -- $ pkg-config --cflags libgeotiff -I/usr/include/libgeotiff/libgeotiff -- * Directory ownership issue -- $ LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/epsg_csv/alias.csv libgeotiff-1.2.4-0.2.rc1.fc8 $ LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/epsg_csv/ file /usr/share/epsg_csv is not owned by any package -- (In reply to comment #5) At a point my plan is to split separate epsg-data.noarch one and re-base gdal and geotiff over it. Thats should be clearest way include EPSG dataset, and trace down how csv files are generated. * A question: - Are there any other (splitted) source which contains only EPSG data or are you going to create epsg-data rpm as a subpackage of libgeotiff? - When epsg-data is splitted out, will epsg-data be needed only to rebuild libgeotiff or gdal, or will it be needed even for runtime? -- 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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:29 EST --- Created an attachment (id=159837) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=159837action=view) m17n-contrib.spec-1.1.3-script-perm.patch This worksaround the script being installed 644. Could you report it upstream please when you have time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211319] Review Request: andutteye-client - Andutteye Software Suite Monitoring agent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andutteye-client - Andutteye Software Suite Monitoring agent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211319 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:43 EST --- This bug will be closed if no response will be received from the reported within one week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 03:58 EST --- Above patch fixes the above rpmlint warning. The rpmlint warnings like W: m17n-contrib-assamese no-documentation can be waived since the main m17n-contrib package carries the %doc files and is required by m17n-contrib-*. Formal review follows: + package follow naming guidelines + meets packaging guidelines (formerly part of m17n-db) + license is LGPL, included + spec file is clean + verified source tarball is pristine: f9a6c6d19cb4f27be15db3ec11f95247 m17n-contrib-1.1.3.tar.gz + noarch build fine + buildrequires m17n-db + uses find_lang + requires m17n-db for directory ownership (please add icons dir ownership there) + filelists and perms ok with above patch + macros consistently used Package is APPROVED. Please fix the script permission before importing to cvs. -- 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 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] 2007-07-24 04:22 EST --- ping -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 04:37 EST --- Thanks for 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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 04:42 EST --- here are updated links Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/m17n/m17n-contrib.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/m17n/m17n-contrib-1.1.3-1.1.fc8.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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 04:48 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: m17n-contrib Short Description: Contributed m17n input maps Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6 F-7 EL-5 InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 214893] Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214893 [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] 2007-07-24 04:57 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: sipp New Branches: EL-4 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 206872] Review Request: sipsak - SIP swiss army knife
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sipsak - SIP swiss army knife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206872 [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] 2007-07-24 04:59 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: sipsak New Branches: EL-4 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 190189] Review Request: PyQt4: Python bindings for Qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: PyQt4: Python bindings for Qt4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190189
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 05:07 EST ---
In the spec file that comes with #38 there is an error in the install section:
# fix/remove rpath
chrpath --delete $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_python_sitelib}/PyQt4/QtDesigner.so
_python_sitelib should be python_site_lib, cause the first one is never defined.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 224244] Review Request: gaim
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gaim https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224244 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 05:11 EST --- I vote for closing this bug. There is no such application. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190189] Review Request: PyQt4: Python bindings for Qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: PyQt4: Python bindings for Qt4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190189 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 05:11 EST --- ok. also my version was wrong: python_sitelib should be the name... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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] 2007-07-24 05:14 EST --- Still here, just very busy with $DAYJOB at the moment. I'll do a formal review as soon as I can. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 239385] Review Request: peless - Text Browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: peless - Text Browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239385 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:01 EST --- OK please find the following new release: http://download.berlios.de/peless/peless-1.156.tar.bz2 and a new spec file: https://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/peless/spec/peless.spec.fedora BTW;Berlios seems to have let its certificates slip. You might have to override certification to download these files. I have tried to fix most of the problems noted above. Please notify me of any further problems! 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 247402] Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247402 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:24 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) Well, I don't know well about gwave, however is gwave really not bypassed to proceed the review of this package? To review the package ? well ok, but not functional for _proper_ use ! Current gspiceui does not require gwave, so you can just ignore gwave for now? It does require gwave. See its plot function depends on gwave. For gwave: (In reply to comment #16) So now, the question is: are we willing to ship *the latest gwave and at the same time shipping lots of old dependencies ? Absolutely, unless the newest gwave has regression issue problems, for example. Ok, then we will work on that latest gwave. gspiceui's review isn't a problem at all, and will be approved very quickly. But I do care about its functionality (gwave) and have no intention of releasing it half ready. gspiceui is just a GUI upon gwave. We can't release the GUI without the engine which does the whole job. -- 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 247402] Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247402 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:25 EST --- There is a new upstream release: https://sourceforge.net/projects/gspiceui The Changelog related to this release is as follows: * Added a sinusoid function to the NG-Spice signal source configuration dialog. * Tidy up of the Makefiles. * The title line/s in user generated circuit description files are now preserved in the simulation file generated by gSpiceUI. Requested by Andres M. * Fixed a bugs in the GNU-Cap DC and AC command parsers causing them to break when the start and stop sweep values where equal. * Adjustments to the size and position of display components. * For GNU-Cap the option BASIC has been appended to all analysis lines to suppress the use of alpha abbreviations instead of an exponent eg. 3.1u now becomes 3.1E-6. Requested by Andres M. * Introduced an .OPTIONS button on each analysis panel and removed the .OPTIONS option in the Options menu. * Added tooltips to the NG-Spice source component setup dialog and the GNU-Cap generator component dialog. * Improvements to src/Makefile. * NG-Spice negative node values in .PRINT statements were not processed correctly. Eg. PRINT TRAN V(0,1) V(0,2) (2 parameters) is interpreted as PRINT TRAN (-V(1)-V(2)) (1 parameter); I've found through experiment that PRINT TRAN 0-V(1) 0-V(2) results in the correct intepretation. Fixed. * Fixed warnings generated by GCC v4.1.1. * Added tool tips to the OPTIONS line setup dialogs. * gSpiceUI can now be compiled against wxWidgets v2.8.4. * Addition of a man page. Minor updates to the documentation. * The SpinCtrl control is now right justified. * Implement the application preferences dialog. * Some modifications to the PnlValue class. * The main frame's system close button now works. * Automated the creation of dependencies. Added target deps to the Makefile in the C++ sources Makefile. This target creates the file Makefile.deps which contains a list of dependencies which are included in the Makefile. * Many bug 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 248649] Review Request: alliance - Alliance VLSI CAD Sytem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alliance - Alliance VLSI CAD Sytem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248649 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:26 EST --- Ping ? -- 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 241304] Review Request: perl-DBI-Dumper - Dump data from a DBI datasource to file
Please 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-DBI-Dumper - Dump data from a DBI datasource to file Alias: perl-DBI-Dumper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241304 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:43 EST --- any updates? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 238230] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders
Please 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-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238230 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:49 EST --- any plans to build this package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 234612] Review Request: Ice - The Internet Communications Engine (Object middleware)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Ice - The Internet Communications Engine (Object middleware) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234612 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:51 EST --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 234581] Review Request: Mapnik cartography library - first package, need sponsor.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mapnik cartography library - first package, need sponsor. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234581 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:52 EST --- Would you have some new information? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 236486] Review Request: Profugus - automatically migrates Xen virtual machines from one system to another based on CPU time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Profugus - automatically migrates Xen virtual machines from one system to another based on CPU time https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236486 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||o.ca) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:54 EST --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225295] Merge Review: autoconf213
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: autoconf213 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225295 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:56 EST --- (In reply to comment #15) Both are redundant, as both are in the minimum build environment. Perl is explicitly listed among the exceptions in Packaging/Guidelines. gawk is dragged there indirectly, but it is hard to imagine minimal instal without awk. Personally, I think that they shouldn't be in the minimal install and hopefully won't be in the future. Moreover they are really direct build dependencies and it was only a suggestion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 06:57 EST --- Spec URL: http://openrisc.rdsor.ro/libgeotiff.spec SRPM URL: http://openrisc.rdsor.ro/libgeotiff-1.2.4-0.3.rc1.fc8.src.rpm * Tue Jul 24 2007 Balint Cristian [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.2.4-0.3.rc1 - codes are under MIT - pkg-config cflags return fix - epsg_csv ownership RE for #5: I would like to split out epsg data for 3 reasons: - 1) would be nice to have noarch epsg dataset separatley so any time i can respin agains newer versions independently agains gdal/geotiff - 2) this way i can include all _original_ dataset and people can see how it explode in .csv and .inc ones, EPSG loves to see we NOT alter their database just copy portions and re-arange tham, however their sql dumps arent usefull when you fopen() at all. SO license statement will be not brake at all. - 3) gdal and geotiff with small patch can pick up tham on the fly from specific folder, and any respin off epsg would NOT imply rebuild of gdal/geotiff code, actualy they fopen and search through it. However i still discuss with Frank how splitting works i need to find a way for do it in %build section of files. It might be strange since now he use postgresql query to dump in csv files, but in %build time i cannot do like this, so need to rewrite script wich simply parse sql file dumps the same way. Its hard but would be nice. -- 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 07:14 EST --- For epsg data: - So, currently epsg data is included in libgeotiff tarball, however you mean that you (and Frank) want to create new tarball of epsg data and distribute epsg data tarball and libgeotiff tarball seperately, am I correct? In such case, when splitting is done, you have to create a new review request for epsg data (and for now I want to proceed the review of libgeotiff as it is). -- 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 246068] Review Request: mcabber - Console Jabber instant messaging 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: mcabber - Console Jabber instant messaging client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246068 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 07:16 EST --- Imported and built on -devel OK. -- 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 07:24 EST --- 1) It will take a while. 2) Yes I will subbmit new FE-REW one. 3) For now lets follow what we have at all, i agree. -- 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 248407] Review Request: perl-Term-ReadPassword - Asking the user for a password
Please 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-Term-ReadPassword - Asking the user for a password https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248407 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 08:27 EST --- I'll do it tonight. Sorry for the delay. -- 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 225295] Merge Review: autoconf213
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: autoconf213 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225295 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 08:35 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) (In reply to comment #15) Personally, I think that they shouldn't be in the minimal install and hopefully won't be in the future. awk is part of the POSIX standard run-time environment. Unless POSIX changes, you will always find awk installed on any POSIX compliant system. Moreover they are really direct build dependencies and it was only a suggestion. Fedora not having them always installed is a bug in Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 225295] Merge Review: autoconf213
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: autoconf213 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225295 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 09:01 EST --- The minimal install and minimal build environment needs not be POSIX compliant. There could be a POSIX meta package (I guess the LSB package already bring in everything needed for POSIX). I am not saying that it should not be POSIX compliant but it should only if it makes sense, we shouldn't tie ourselves to standards -- while still giving the possibility to conform. More precisely, I personally think that using a comps that has not been tuned should give a minimal install that is POSIX compliant, but in my opinion we should give room for minimal sets that are more minimal than POSIX, and in those minimal install dependencies should still be correct. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 236486] Review Request: Profugus - automatically migrates Xen virtual machines from one system to another based on CPU time
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Profugus - automatically migrates Xen virtual machines from one system to another based on CPU time https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236486 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |o.ca) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 09:24 EST --- i'm still alive :) i haven't fixed everything yet. I have really hard time at work and next 2 weeks will be like hell for me. After that time i should be able to fix everything and make serious changes to the code -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 09:28 EST --- No EL-5 branch needed since it would conflict with m17n-db in RHEL5. Please bump release number to 2 when importing. -- 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 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 09:48 EST --- Updated with current git build: http://people.redhat.com/ajackson/pixman/pixman.spec http://people.redhat.com/ajackson/pixman/pixman-0.9.0-20070724.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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||241242 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 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 09:56 EST --- quick view over the package: 1) $RPM_OPT_FLAGS not used 2) no disttag 3) download link for srpm broken -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) quick view over the package: 1) $RPM_OPT_FLAGS not used Done for me by %configure. 2) no disttag Eh, package isn't actually useful for anything pre-F8, but sure, why not. 3) download link for srpm broken Erk. Fixed: http://people.redhat.com/ajackson/pixman/pixman.spec http://people.redhat.com/ajackson/pixman/pixman-0.9.0-0.20070724.fc8.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 248410] Review Request: perl-Params-CallbackRequest - Functional and object-oriented callback architecture
Please 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-Params-CallbackRequest - Functional and object-oriented callback architecture https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248410 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:17 EST --- There's nothing to fix. This module works with both mod_perl 1 and 2. That test is mod_perl 1-specific. -- 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:25 EST --- Okay. This package (libgeotiff) is APPROVED by me -- 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 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:33 EST ---
Package Review:
==
--
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
--
OK, output:
W: pixman no-documentation
W: pixman-devel no-documentation
upstream only has empty files.
--
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
--
OK
--
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
--
OK
--
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
--
OK
--
MUST: The package must be licensed with an open-source compatible license and
meet other legal requirements.
--
OK
--
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
--
OK (MIT)
Note: Please ask upstream to fix the empty COPYING file
--
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file,
containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
--
File exits but empty so OK (not packaged)
--
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
--
OK
--
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
--
OK
--
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
--
N/A (git snapshot)
--
MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
--
OK (Tested on F7 x86_64)
--
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
--
N/A
--
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
--
OK
--
MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
--
OK
--
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of
that specific package.
--
OK (not relocateable)
--
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
--
OK
--
MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
--
OK
--
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
--
OK
--
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
--
OK
--
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for
directory ownership and usability).
--
OK
--
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
--
OK
--
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
--
OK
--
MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
--
OK
--
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
[Bug 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:36 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pixman Short Description: Pixel manipulation library for cairo and X Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: 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 185531] Review Request: fcron, a task scheduler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fcron, a task scheduler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185531 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:42 EST --- added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 193531] Review Request: kicad - Electronic schematic diagrams and printed circuit board artwork
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kicad - Electronic schematic diagrams and printed circuit board artwork https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193531 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:44 EST --- added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 249234] Review Request: Mozilla Sunbird - Standalone calendar from the Mozilla Project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: Mozilla Sunbird - Standalone calendar from the Mozilla
Project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249234
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:47 EST ---
Does normal compile {not rpm build} work ? I reckon that's the first step.
--
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 206872] Review Request: sipsak - SIP swiss army knife
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sipsak - SIP swiss army knife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206872 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:52 EST --- added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 214893] Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214893 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 10:53 EST --- added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 207532] Review Request: kbackup - Back up your data in a simple, user friendly way
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kbackup - Back up your data in a simple, user friendly way https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207532 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:06 EST --- added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:09 EST --- added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 249006] Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: m17n-contrib - Contributed m17n input maps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:13 EST --- cvsadmin 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 249059] Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249059
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:16 EST ---
Fedora Package Review: wdaemon
--
MUST Items:
* rpmlint output acceptable (post full output w/waiver notes where needed):
$ rpmlint /build/RPMS/x86_64/wdaemon-*0.10-2*
W: wdaemon non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/61-uinput-wacom.rules
W: wdaemon non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/61-uinput-stddev.rules
I'm thinking it wouldn't hurt to just mark these %config(noreplace), in the
event a user does go and edit them/append to them. It completely silences
rpmlint if we go that route, and I don't see any real reason not to just do it.
* Meets Package Naming Guidelines: PASS
* spec file name matches %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec (nb: there are a
few exceptions): PASS
* The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines: PASS
* open-source compatible license and meets fedora legal reqs: PASS
* License field in spec matches actual license: PASS
* If source includes text of license(s) in its own file, that file must be in
%doc: PASS
* spec file legible and in American English: PASS
* sources used match the upstream source, as provided in spec URL. Verify with
md5sum (if no upstream URL, source creation method must be documented and can be
verified using diff): PASS
$ md5sum wdaemon-0.10.tar.bz2*
9c90cefbe4ae7d6c79ded408f9a435a7 wdaemon-0.10.tar.bz2
9c90cefbe4ae7d6c79ded408f9a435a7 wdaemon-0.10.tar.bz2.1
* produces binary rpms on at least one arch: PASS (f7/x86_64)
* If ExcludeArch used, must be documented why (and a bug filed against ExArch
tracker once approved): NEEDS WORK
Generally, we're to assume the package will build on any architecture, and
only exclude it from building on a certain arch if there's a good reason to do
so. ExclusiveArch is really frowned upon, unless its a package that really only
makes sense on a very limited set or arches.
* BuildRequires are sane: PASS
* locales, if necessary, handled properly with %find_lang: N/A
* if package contains shared libs, calls ldconfig in %post/postun: N/A
* if package is relocatable, must justify: N/A
* package owns all directories it creates: PASS
* no duplicates in %files: PASS
* Permissions on %files sane: PASS -- though I might suggest some further
updates to the Makefile to use 'install -m' to install the binaries and init
script, rather than having to use %attr in the %files section.
* %clean includes rm -rf %{buildroot}/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT: PASS
* macros used consistently: PASS
* package contains code, or permissable content: PASS
* Large/lots of docs, if present, should go in a -doc subpackage: N/A
* files in %doc aren't required for package to work: PASS
* Header files in -devel package: N/A
* Static libs in -static package: N/A
* package Reqs: pkgconfig if pkgconfig(.pc) files present: N/A
* if package has versioned libs, unversioned ones go in -devel package: N/A
* if present, -devel packages must require the base package NVR (w/some rare
exceptions): N/A
* no libtool archives (w/some rare exceptions): PASS
* if GUI app, include a %{name}.desktop file, installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section (or justify why not): N/A
* don't own files or folders other package own (or justify why you must): PASS
* %install starts with rm -rf %{buildroot}/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT: PASS
* filenames in packages must be valid UTF-8: PASS
SHOULD Items (not absolutely mandatory, but highly encouraged)
* If source does not include license text(s), ask upstream to include it: N/A
(already included)
* description and summary sections in spec should contain translations for
supported Non-English languages, if available: N/A
* package should build in mock: PASS (f7/x86_64)
* package should build on all supported architectures: not tested
* package should function as expected: don't have hardware to test myself
* any scriptlets must be sane: N/A
* subpackages other than -devel require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: N/A
* pkgconfig files go in -devel pkg, unless package is a devel tool itself: N/A
* If package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the
file itself: N/A
--
So for the short version, I'd add %config(noreplace) for the two udev rules
files, since it looks like it only helps and use ExcludeArch: if you really need
to have this not build on a
[Bug 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:18 EST --- Created an attachment (id=159855) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=159855action=view) cleanup specfile * Tue Jul 24 2007 Than Ngo [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 3.91.0-4 - add BuildRequires: doxygen - add README COPYING COPYING.BSD COPYING.LIB - rename to kdepimlibs Kevin, could you please approve this, so we can commit into kde4-branch CVS? Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #159855|0 |1 is obsolete|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249059] Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249059 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:25 EST --- Excerpt from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla entries during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the long explanation with the bug number. (Extras Only) The bug should be marked as blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues: FE-ExcludeArch-x86, FE-ExcludeArch-x64, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64 I believe something similar should be done if ExclusiveArch is used instead of ExcludeArch, particularly if the ppc64 exclusion was intentional. If ppc64 is added to the ExclusiveArch for this package, then I think there probably isn't anything extra to be done here -- not building this for s390 just seems like common sense, no need to file a bug. -- 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 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:25 EST --- I already did (fedora-review is already +, I've also just checked your changes and can confirm that they adress the 2 points I raised), all that's missing is the CVS request. I can fill it out if you want, but normally it's the submitter doing it. :-) Your BuildRequires: doxygen won't do anything by itself. It also needs the make apidox or something like that and the -apidocs subpackage. But as I already said, this can be addressed later. -- 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 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:26 EST --- Created an attachment (id=159857) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=159857action=view) cleanup specfile correct specfile -- 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 225295] Merge Review: autoconf213
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: autoconf213 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225295 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:28 EST --- (In reply to comment #18) The minimal install and minimal build environment needs not be POSIX compliant. Once again: POSIX is an official standard (IEEE Std 1003.1), not an arbitrary vendor package set. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:29 EST --- Kevin, it's nice if you could fill it out please. So i can commit it into CVS ASAP. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:32 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: kdepimlibs Short Description: K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Flag||fedora-cvs? -- 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 238230] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders
Please 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-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238230 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 11:51 EST --- I have been unsuccessful in getting any response from Chris for some time now. He was active on IRC about four days ago (according to the server, at least) but he didn't respond to my pings. I'm getting ready to start closing some of his other tickets. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 238230] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders
Please 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-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238230 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:07 EST --- Sorry about all that. Real Life is taking a sustained toll on me and I'm finding myself unable to dedicate much time to Fedora at the moment; fortunately things are starting to clear up. I'll request branching and import -- Sorry about that Parag, I didn't see the flag being set w/o the canonical APPROVED comment :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 238230] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders
Please 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-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238230 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:09 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView Short Description: Sensible default end action for view renders Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6, F-7, devel InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238230] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders
Please 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-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238230 [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 238238] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Devel - Catalyst Development Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Devel - Catalyst Development Tools Alias: perl-Catalyst-Devel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238238 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:16 EST --- Pong :) SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Catalyst-Devel-1.02-2.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Catalyst-Devel.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 249059] Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249059 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:18 EST --- * rpmlint output acceptable (post full output w/waiver notes where needed): $ rpmlint /build/RPMS/x86_64/wdaemon-*0.10-2* W: wdaemon non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/61-uinput-wacom.rules W: wdaemon non-conffile-in-etc /etc/udev/rules.d/61-uinput-stddev.rules I'm thinking it wouldn't hurt to just mark these %config(noreplace), in the event a user does go and edit them/append to them. It completely silences rpmlint if we go that route, and I don't see any real reason not to just do it. fixed * If ExcludeArch used, must be documented why (and a bug filed against ExArch tracker once approved): NEEDS WORK ok, removed excludearch/exclusivearch: the package will compile and work on all architectures. It may be not useful if the machine doesn't has USB ports to use a tablet. * Permissions on %files sane: PASS -- though I might suggest some further updates to the Makefile to use 'install -m' to install the binaries and init script, rather than having to use %attr in the %files section. fixed. All the fixes included as patches are queued for next upstream release http://people.redhat.com/arozansk/wdaemon/ -- 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 248649] Review Request: alliance - Alliance VLSI CAD Sytem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: alliance - Alliance VLSI CAD Sytem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248649
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:23 EST ---
Review of version - release : 5.0-3.20070718snap
* From Previous comments:
- multilibs, As there is no more -devel package, the multilibs problems on
repository is solved. This mean there is no headers to write plugins for
alliance ? Then OK.
- 5 Ok for not using desktop-file-utils. But on my Gnome environnement, the
menues are showed in Edutainment which is not a right name in my view (mostly
because it is not translated)
Also X-Desktop-File-Install-Version=0.10 in sources desktop files is wrong. This
field is added at install time..Be carefull that desktop-file-install in F8
rawhide is no more permissive with theses littles errors. (not tested yet...)
- 7 / 9 / 16 : OK
- Still i don't understand why you used macro for name of patches.
That might be better to have them in full name (as the name will not change)
* New comments: (now it builds in mock on x86_64)
(rpmlint on rpm packages )
- Names are too generic. For headers in %{_includedir}/*.h and libraries in
%{_libdir}/*.so, maybe you can at least uses a subdirectory with them (and put a
path for in /etc/ld.so.conf.d )
When trying to install it:
---
le fichier /usr/include/btr.h de l'installation de
alliance-5.0-3.20070718snap.fc6 entre en conflit avec le fichier du paquetage
mx-2.0.6-2.2.2
le fichier /usr/share/man/man3/log.3.gz de l'installation de
alliance-5.0-3.20070718snap.fc6 entre en conflit avec le fichier du paquetage
man-pages-2.39-7.fc6
--
- E: alliance non-executable-script /etc/alliance/attila.conf 0644
See why this is considered as script (may be safe to ignore...
Also, maybe not all files in /etc/%{name} will need %config(no replace)
This can be better to have only %{config} for some of them. For example if
they are changing between release and need to be updated with no user choice...
For files that depend on users choice , the better way could be to have files
to be sourced in a sub-directory... (maybe not relevant, in this case...)
- W: alliance non-conffile-in-etc /etc/alliance/alc_env.csh
Not sure it is the right place for it...?! why this have changed from
profiles.d ?
(rpmlint on installed file : rpmlint alliance )
- Untested - (package cannot be installed becaue mx is in use)
--
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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:26 EST --- Please write the CVS Request according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure -- 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 247402] Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247402 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:33 EST --- [reply to comment #18] *the latest gwave and at the same time shipping lots of old dependencies ? Absolutely, unless the newest gwave has regression issue problems, for example. Ok, then we will work on that latest gwave. note: the lastest gwave is named gwave2 gspiceui is just a GUI upon gwave. We can't release the GUI without the engine which does the whole job. +1 [comment #19] i'll do some workaround on it -- 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:34 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: libgeotiff Short Description: GeoTIFF format library Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6 F-7 EL-4 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 241304] Review Request: perl-DBI-Dumper - Dump data from a DBI datasource to file
Please 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-DBI-Dumper - Dump data from a DBI datasource to file Alias: perl-DBI-Dumper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241304 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:39 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) any updates? To what exactly? :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 230096] Review Request: iwlwifi-firmwa re - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 3945 A/B /G network adaptors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: iwlwifi-firmware - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 3945 A/B/G network adaptors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230096 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 12:58 EST --- notting makes a good point here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248224#c10 Perhaps iwl3945-firmware is a better name? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 230096] Review Request: iwlwifi-firmwa re - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 3945 A/B /G network adaptors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: iwlwifi-firmware - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 3945 A/B/G network adaptors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230096 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 13:08 EST --- Yes, absolutely! Here is the re-renamed package : http://ftp.es6.freshrpms.net/tmp/extras/iwl3945-firmware/ All we need to do now is : 1) Get the iwl4965-firmware package passed review. 2) Get iwlwifi-firmware (this package) renamed (cvs, bugzilla... the usual). 3) Push both at the same time to at least devel (but possibly F-7 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 249296] Review Request: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler 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: libgeotiff - GeoTIFF format handler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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 238230] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders
Please 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-Catalyst-Action-RenderView - Sensible default end action for view renders https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238230 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |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 248898] Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdepimlibs - K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248898 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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 247312] Review Request: MyPasswordSafe - A graphical password management 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: MyPasswordSafe - A graphical password management tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247312 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?(redhat- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 13:49 EST --- error 404 -- 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 248730] Review Request: nss_compat_ossl - OpenSSL to NSS porting 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: nss_compat_ossl - OpenSSL to NSS porting library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248730 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 14:06 EST --- I've only built this on rawhide right now but we have the FC-6 and F-7 branches available if desired. -- 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 249212] Review Request: inchi - The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier 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: inchi - The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249212 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 14:23 EST --- License: LGPL Not necessary to do this in the -devel package. If you are going to develop programs which will use this library you should install inchi-devel. You'll also need to have the inchi package installed. Is this part necessary? http://www.iupac.org/inchi/license.html Licensing is confusing... - It implies trademark integrity within the context of copyright terms. - It implies a request of copyright advertisement clause, but it seems non-binding by this language. Is this the intent? - None of the source files contain proper copyright notices. Recommendation: 1) Upstream should clear up this confusion by creating a clear separation between the copyright and trademark rights. Copyright explicitly LGPL, and have a separate page/file containing the trademark guidelines. http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html As an example, Mozilla uses a trademark guideline to protect the integrity of their mark, without running afoul of the (L)GPL requirement of no additional restrictions on the copyright. 2) All source files must contain a proper and explicit copyright notice. To quote LGPL: You must give prominent notice with each copy of the work that the Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are covered by this License. Under the terms of the LGPL, those copyright statements would of course not be removed by others. -- 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 189013] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy - Modular and flexible ORM library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-sqlalchemy - Modular and flexible ORM library for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189013 [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] 2007-07-24 14:25 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-sqlalchemy New Branches: EL-5 Updated Fedora Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Updated Fedora CC: Updated EPEL Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Officially adding comaintainers and branching for EPEL-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 249212] Review Request: inchi - The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier 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: inchi - The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249212 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 249365] Review Request: alpine - UW Alpine mail user agent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alpine - UW Alpine mail user agent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249365 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 14:34 EST --- Thanks very much for taking a look. I began with the SPEC provided at the alpine download site, and will try to get the changes upstream. That's also why this is release 2 instead of 1. - Is the Conflict tag really needed? couldn't it be replaced with a proper versioned Obsoletes? I used the Conflicts tag instead of Obsoletes because there are important differences between pine and alpine. For example, non-ASCII encoded saved passwords will break because of the change to Unicode. There are also many patches to pine floating around that for political/technical reasons will not be integrated into alpine. (I'd like to stay out of it... just search Mark Crispin maildir for the gory details.) Since licensing prevents a Fedora pine package, I have no idea what configuration users might have and so want to warn them instead of automatically replacing their pine install with an alpine that could break their configuration. (It is also possible to run pine and alpine concurrently, but the names of /usr/bin/pico and /usr/bin/pilot conflict.) Quick glance over the spec: - Ditch the vendor and packager tags; fedora build system will fill in the Done. - Are you sure that the Description tag needs the second and third paragraph? Well, I don't think a little more description hurts anything. The 2nd paragraph is for non-technical users, and the 3rd for technical. I see that mutt has a description similar to the 2nd paragraph: You should install mutt if you have used it in the past and you prefer it, or if you are new to mail programs and have not decided which one you are going to use. - Ditch the '[ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT != / ] ' part from %clean and %install. It Done. - It would be wiser to use the 4 arguments form of %defattr OK, done. - I have to recheck that, but I think Applications/Mail does not seem to be a standard group I changed it to Applications/Internet which is the same at mutt. - Apache 2.0 does not seem to be the proper value for the license tag (according to http://www.opensource.org/licenses/apache2.0.php I guess it should be Apache License, Version 2.0) I looks like it's been standardized on Apache Software License: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-June/msg00072.html I guess you only have to specify version if it's 1.1 or 1.0. Here's a couple examples I found: rpm -qi httpd tomcat5-jsp-2.0-api|grep License Size: 2572641 License: Apache Software License Size: 143766 License: Apache Software License - last but not least, mock build fails with: OK, fixed. I was building on my existing RHEL4 build system which doesn't have mock (yet?), but now I set up a Fedora 7 build system and used mock. Building the autocache is wicked slow, maybe that could be mirrored. New SPEC and SRPM are at the same places: spec URL: http://staff.washington.edu/joshuadf/alpine/alpine.spec SRPM URL: http://staff.washington.edu/joshuadf/alpine/alpine-0.999-2.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 240616] Review Request: pixman - pixel manipulation 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: pixman - pixel manipulation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240616 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 14:46 EST --- Imported but not built, because: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=75713 BuildError: package pixman not in list for tag dist-f8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 248119] Review Request: libtimidity - MIDI to WAVE converter 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: libtimidity - MIDI to WAVE converter library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248119 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 14:58 EST --- Imported and build, closing. -- 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 247312] Review Request: MyPasswordSafe - A graphical password management 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: MyPasswordSafe - A graphical password management tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247312 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 15:31 EST --- Fixed. -- 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 201477] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201477 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 15:35 EST --- Please update: Owner: Robin Norwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229098] Review Request: openjpeg - JPEG 2000 codec 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: openjpeg - JPEG 2000 codec library Alias: openjpeg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229098 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 15:41 EST --- Hmmm, I'm trying to get some patches upstreamed. I should probably get a new package out in the mean time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 248649] Review Request: alliance - Alliance VLSI CAD Sytem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alliance - Alliance VLSI CAD Sytem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248649 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 15:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) Review of version - release : 5.0-3.20070718snap - 5 Ok for not using desktop-file-utils. But on my Gnome environnement, the menues are showed in Edutainment which is not a right name in my view (mostly because it is not translated) All scientific apps of fedora are placed at that location: * ktechlab * geda/gaf * magic * xcircuit * qucs * labplot (to name a few) Not sure it is the right place for it...?! why this have changed from profiles.d ? It has always been this way, i.e in all my releases there were 2 symbolic links on /etc/profile.d In my previous releases, the alc_env* scripts were at /usr/share/alliance/etc, in the release 3 they were moved to /etc/allliance. I'll include your other comments in the release 4. -- 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 188740] Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188740 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 15:48 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-paramiko Updated Fedora Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Updated EPEL Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Adding Ignacio Vasquez as a comaintainer -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or 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 188740] Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188740 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |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 230344] Review Request: bacula - Cross platform network backup for Linux, Unix, Mac and Windows.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bacula - Cross platform network backup for Linux, Unix, Mac and Windows. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230344 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 15:49 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: bacula Short Description: Cross platform network backup for Linux, Unix, Mac and Windows Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6 F-7 EL-5 EL-4 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 248224] Review Request: iwl4965-firmwa re - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 4965 A/G /N network adaptors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: iwl4965-firmware - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 4965 A/G/N network adaptors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248224 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 16:50 EST --- Current version is 4.44.17 fwiw... -- 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 249365] Review Request: alpine - UW Alpine mail user agent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: alpine - UW Alpine mail user agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249365
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-24 17:03 EST ---
I guess I should have publicized my (in-my-spare-time) efforts at packaging
Alpine more widely than in #fedora-devel and the alpine-alpha mailing list. :-P
It looks like you caught most of the snags I did, but if you want to eyeball my
spec, see:
http://beer.tclug.org/fedora-extras/alpine/alpine.spec
Your rpdoc.patch and my alpine-manpages.patch are effectively identical, I see,
aside from the directory name being in mine (necessitating -p1 instead of -p0,
big whup). I still hadn't made up my mind about whether the
s/%{version}/%{version}-%{release}/ is a good idea.
I'd be happy to comaintain Alpine with you, although I can't sponsor you (as
I'm not a sponsor). :-(
Also, you might want to fix your SRPM link to reflect the dist tag. ;-)
--
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
