[Bug 458548] Review Request: liburiparser - URI parsing library - RFC 3986
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458548 --- Comment #4 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 02:55:11 EDT --- @jason Yes, you are very right. Thanks. I was just concerned why was it like that never though about a way around. Updated: SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/liburiparser.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/liburiparser-0.7.1-2.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457808] Review Request: gwibber - An open source microblogging client for GNOME developed with Python and GTK
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457808 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 03:24:20 EDT --- gwibber-0.7-2.61bzr.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457808] Review Request: gwibber - An open source microblogging client for GNOME developed with Python and GTK
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457808 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 03:25:18 EDT --- gwibber-0.7-2.61bzr.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452078] Review Request: node - Simple node front end, modelled after the node shells of TheNet and G8BPQ nodes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452078 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 03:46:41 EDT --- node-0.3.2-4.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452078] Review Request: node - Simple node front end, modelled after the node shells of TheNet and G8BPQ nodes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452078 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 03:45:58 EDT --- node-0.3.2-4.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452078] Review Request: node - Simple node front end, modelled after the node shells of TheNet and G8BPQ nodes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452078 Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250971] Review Request: ivtv - userspace tools for iTVC15/16 and CX23415/16 driven devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250971 --- Comment #36 from Axel Thimm [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 03:50:00 EDT --- http://dl.atrpms.net/all/ivtv-fedora.spec http://dl.atrpms.net/all/ivtv-1.2.0-5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 421241] Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=421241
--- Comment #53 from Jess Portnoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 04:05:39 EDT
---
Hi Alex,
I was thinking, it might be a good idea for the RPM %post to run the following:
sed '[EMAIL PROTECTED](^include_path\s*=\s*.*\)@\1:%{_datadir}/php@' -i
/etc/php.ini
So that the prefix for ZF is found within PHP's include path.
I don't think it's a must and can also think of reasons why not to interfere
with the php.ini but still, thought I'd suggest it none the less.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 227190] Review Request: php-pear-Auth-OpenID - PHP OpenID
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=227190 Axel Thimm [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||2.1.1-6 Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455211] Review Request: php-laconica - PHP tool for microblogging
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 Bug 455211 depends on bug 227190, which changed state. Bug 227190 Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Auth-OpenID - PHP OpenID https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=227190 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 218581] Review Request: mediawiki-openid - The OpenID extension for MediaWiki
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=218581 Bug 218581 depends on bug 227190, which changed state. Bug 227190 Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Auth-OpenID - PHP OpenID https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=227190 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455211] Review Request: php-laconica - PHP tool for microblogging
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 --- Comment #2 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 04:37:49 EDT --- This need an update. I will wait till these two dependent package reviews are done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455039 php-oauth https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454395 php-xmpphp -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458405] Review Request: pisg - Perl IRC Statistics Generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458405 --- Comment #2 from Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 05:05:23 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pisg Short Description: Perl IRC Statistics Generator owners: sindrepb Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458245] Review Request: python-markdown - Markdown implementation in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458245 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Moschny [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 05:14:48 EDT --- Oops. Spec URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/python-markdown.spec SRPM URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/python-markdown-1.7-1.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called VT100-compatible terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458408 --- Comment #2 from Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 05:11:22 EDT --- Updated: - License change to MIT - Changed macro usage in %prep Spec URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest.spec SRPM URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest-20071216-2.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called VT100-compatible terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458408
Miroslav Lichvar [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Customer Facing||---
--- Comment #3 from Miroslav Lichvar [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 05:39:53
EDT ---
One detail, better source URL to use is
ftp://invisible-island.net/vttest/vttest-%{version}.tgz
so we won't have different versions saved in file with the same name.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458345] Review Request: Rabbyt - sprite library for Python with game development in mind
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458345 --- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 05:49:14 EDT --- SPEC: http://packages.cassmodiah.de/fedora/rabbyt/bugzilla/2/python-rabbyt.spec SRPM: http://packages.cassmodiah.de/fedora/rabbyt/bugzilla/2/python-rabbyt-0.8.1-2.fc9.src.rpm renamed from Rabbyt to python-rabbyt to honor the Python Naming Guidelines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454025] Review Request: libixp - stand-alone client/server 9P library including ixpc client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454025 --- Comment #5 from Ionuț Arțăriși [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 06:03:46 EDT --- Thank you for the review! Sorry for not answering all this time and thanks for continuing to ping. I had given up on the package because I got stuck. I managed to add a few of the stuff you proposed, but not others. I uploaded the new spec and src.rpms, though they still have errors: http://mapleoin.fedorapeople.org/libixp-0.4-2.fc9.i386.rpm http://mapleoin.fedorapeople.org/libixp.spec I'm not sure if the libraries should be in the -devel part or if i should replace that with a -static section(though from what I read in the Packaging Guidelines, that's strongly discouraged) I'm afraid I need more help in order to get this specfile right. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457924] Review Request: libmicrohttpd - Lightweight library for embedding a webserver in applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457924 --- Comment #2 from Erik van Pienbroek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 06:24:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) This package needs a license review, I think. You have License: LGPLv2, but the source files all seem to be either LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ (grep for GNU Lesser and GNU General and note the any later version language present in all files). However, I don't know if any of the GPLv2+ stuff ends up on the final binary; it seems to be test-related. You will need to check that; if that's the case, then the final product is GPLv2+; otherwise I think it would be LGPLv2+ unless some other license is involved. The website of this project says the license is LGPL. This is confirmed in a mailing list posting ( http://crisp.cs.du.edu/pipermail/libmicrohttpd/2007/01.html ) and a bugreport ( https://gnunet.org/mantis/view.php?id=1384 ). In the Subversion repository of this project, everything is already changed to LGPLv2+. I'll change the License tag to LGPLv2+ in the spec file rpmlint says: libmicrohttpd.x86_64: W: no-documentation Actually the COPYING file should be in the main package, and this will go away when that's fixed. (Eliminating this complaint isn't the reason for moving the COPYING file; we just want the license information in the package that people will be installing.) Fixed by moving the COPYING file to the main package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457924] Review Request: libmicrohttpd - Lightweight library for embedding a webserver in applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457924 --- Comment #3 from Erik van Pienbroek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 06:27:05 EDT --- New package @ http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/libmicrohttpd.spec and http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/libmicrohttpd-0.3.1-2.fc10.src.rpm I also forgot to mention the location of the SVN repository of this project, this is https://gnunet.org/svn/libmicrohttpd -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 421241] Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=421241
--- Comment #54 from Alexander Kahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 06:43:39
EDT ---
Hi Jess,
nice idea but actually useless for Fedora:
include_path is not set in php.ini by default, instead it's hard-coded by a
patch to
.:/usr/share/pear:/usr/share/php
(in C: INCLUDE_PATH=.:$EXPANDED_PEAR_INSTALLDIR:${EXPANDED_DATADIR}/php)
Our policy is to install PEAR packages into /usr/share/pear and all other PHP
packages into /usr/share/php; if anyone wishes to override the path, he or she
has to make sure the default still applies.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458391] Review Request: Bro - Open-source, Unix-based Network Intrusion Detection System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458391
--- Comment #2 from Dan Kopeček [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 06:47:09 EDT ---
Miloslav Trmač [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not a formal review: I didn't go through Packaging/Guidelines,
and I won't be able to reply during the next week.
rpmlint output:
bro.i386: E:
wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/bro/capture-events.bro $Id:
bro.i386: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/bro/capture-events.bro
0644
bro.i386: E:
wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/bro/capture-state-updates.bro $Id:
bro.i386: E:
non-executable-script /usr/share/bro/capture-state-updates.bro 0644
The .bro files are not scripts, so this is not a problem.
bro.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/bro/ftp-safe-words.bro
Shipped that way, OK.
bro.i386: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/bro
Have you checked this is OK?
I think this is ok because Bro periodically creates new log files (this can be
set in /etc/sysconfig/bro). But it ships some archiving script too that are not
installed now - I will fix that after I rewrite this scripts as they are not
usable in our environment now.
bro.i386: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/bro $prog
rpmlint can not expand $prog, this is OK.
* blocker: The Release: field does not follow
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
Changed to: 0.1.%{snapshot}svn%{?dist}
* blocker: License: should be BSD with advertising
* Why is the Requires: perl openssl zlib ncurses line necessary?
- I can't see anything that requires perl
- libssl dependency is discovered automatically; nothing uses the
command-line utility
- libz dependency is discovered automatically
- Only shtool, which is not shipped at all, uses the command-line
programs from ncurses.
Fixed. (removed)
* blocker: bro seems to ship its own copy of libedit. If it's true, bro
needs to be patched to link to the package shipped in the libedit rpm.
Yes, it ships its own libedit but it is not installed nor linked with any
installed executables, so this should be ok.
Thanks for review
New SRPM: http://mildew.pfy.cz/redhat/bro/bro-1.4-0.1.20080804svn.fc8.src.rpm
New spec: http://mildew.pfy.cz/redhat/bro/bro.spec
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735 --- Comment #17 from Christian Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:21:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) I think the issue that was holding this up has been fixed; can this ticket be closed now? Building still fails on PPC due to the GCC internal error on F-9... Are you sure a new GCC has been pushed ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433161] Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433161 Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Resolution|DEFERRED| --- Comment #11 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:32:57 EDT --- Hello, I'm taking over this request. I've moved schematics to doc directory, updated README file to specify correct location and added initial configuration file and sysvinit script to startup cwdaemon... ... and finally bumped version. New versions: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cwdaemon.spec http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cwdaemon-0.9.4-7.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735 --- Comment #18 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:34:35 EDT --- I do not know if Jakub intends to fix the issue on F-9; I pinged on bug 450889. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457924] Review Request: libmicrohttpd - Lightweight library for embedding a webserver in applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457924 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:37:49 EDT --- Well, we trust the licenses on the actual code in preference to what upstream says on their web site. Upstreams rarely pay as much attention to licensing as we do and their web sites are often woefully inaccurate. The presence of GPL source in the tarball should indicate that. We could either wait until a new release comes out with the licensing cleaned up, or pull a snapshot from SVN, but it would probably be more reasonable to include a copy of that mailing list post as documentation in the package, and include those links as comments in the spec. Otherwise I think this package is fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735 --- Comment #19 from Christian Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:44:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) I do not know if Jakub intends to fix the issue on F-9; I pinged on bug 450889. Thanks tibbs. I requested a push of staden-io_lib for F-8. If GCC won't be fixed in F-9 I'll just close this ticket, but let's wait a bit to see what are Jakub's intentions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||450889 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735
--- Comment #20 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:52:14 EDT
---
Well, by the time gcc issue is fixed on F-9, I propose a workaround like:
%build
#%% configure --disable-static
%configure --enable-shared
%if 0%{?fedora} == 9
# First build source as much as possible
# Next downgrade optimization level due to gcc ICE (bug 450889)
make -k %{?_smp_mflags} || :
make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS=`echo %optflags | sed -e 's|-O2|-O|'`
%else
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%endif
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453119] Review Request: libvirt-java: Java bindings for the libvirt library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453119 Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Customer Facing||--- Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #18 from Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 07:54:38 EDT --- Oh, right, forgot to close. thanks for your help Jason ! Daniel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735 --- Comment #21 from Christian Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 08:27:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) Well, by the time gcc issue is fixed on F-9, I propose a workaround like: ... Oh, ok. I applied your workaround and the build went fine. Good idea, thanks. I'll close this ticket now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444735] Review Request: staden-io_lib - General purpose library to handle gene sequencing machine trace files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444735 Christian Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433161] Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433161 --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 08:30:56 EDT --- I would suggest opening your own review ticket and closing this one as a duplicate of it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458345] Review Request: python-rabbyt - sprite library for Python with game development in mind
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458345 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: Rabbyt -|Review Request: |sprite library for Python |python-rabbyt - sprite |with game development in|library for Python with |mind|game development in mind -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454215] Review Request: stk - Synthesis ToolKit in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454215 --- Comment #9 from Thomas Moschny [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 08:38:59 EDT --- Current status of this package: Spec URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/stk.spec SRPM URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/stk-4.3.1-3.fc9.src.rpm %changelog * Thu Jul 31 2008 Thomas Moschny ... - 4.3.1-3 - Remove src/include/dsound.h, and src/include/*asio* files from the tarball, for legal reasons. Only used on windows anyway. - Remove src/include/soundcard.h (explicitly forbids modification) and disable OSS support. - Build and pack Md2Skini. - Build and pack the examples. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433161] Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433161 Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||DEFERRED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458585] New: Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458585 Summary: Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cwdaemon.spec SRPM URL: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cwdaemon-0.9.4-7.fc9.src.rpm Description: Cwdaemon is a small daemon which uses the pc parallel or serial port and a simple transistor switch to output morse code to a transmitter from a text message sent to it via the udp internet protocol. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433161] Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433161 Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|DEFERRED|DUPLICATE --- Comment #13 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 08:40:33 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 458585 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458585] Review Request: cwdaemon - Morse daemon for the parallel or serial port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458585 Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #1 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 08:40:33 EDT --- *** Bug 433161 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 Jan ONDREJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #9 from Jan ONDREJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 09:27:22 EDT --- Does not build in my F8 mock: ERROR: Bad build req: No Package Found for ocaml-bitstring-devel = 1.9.7. Also does not work on my F8 xen machine: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# virt-uname Fatal error: exception Failure(Domain-0: use -W to define word size for this image) Is it possible to make it usable for current stable xen distribution (F8)? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457924] Review Request: libmicrohttpd - Lightweight library for embedding a webserver in applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457924 --- Comment #5 from Erik van Pienbroek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 09:34:26 EDT --- After some more investigation of the latest SVN snapshot I've found out there's a license incompatibility involved in this project. The HTTPS part of libmicrohttpd makes use of a (bundled and modified copy of) opencdk and openpgp. Both these projects are licensed under the GPLv2+ (opencdk) and GPLv3+ (openpgp) licenses. If libmicrohttpd really is LGPLv2+ this is a license incompatibility as these licenses don't mix. There are also some other files which are still licensed under the GPLv2+ license, but as these are only testcases they are valid (they aren't bundled in the RPM files anyway). I've reported this issue at upstream's bugtracker: https://gnunet.org/mantis/view.php?id=1404 If upstream doesn't respond in a few days, I'll disable HTTPS support in the package until the issue is really solved, but for now we'll have to wait for more clearance. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458588] New: Review Request: qsstv - Qt-based slow-scan TV and fax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: qsstv - Qt-based slow-scan TV and fax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458588 Summary: Review Request: qsstv - Qt-based slow-scan TV and fax Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/qsstv.spec SRPM URL: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/qsstv-5.3-0.1.c.fc9.src.rpm Description: Qsstv is a program for receiving slow-scan television and fax. These are modes used by hamradio operators. Qsstv uses a soundcard to send and receive images. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457924] Review Request: libmicrohttpd - Lightweight library for embedding a webserver in applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457924 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:22:42 EDT --- I'm not sure there's any incompatibility there; the result would simply be GPLv3+. Perhaps the legal folks should look over things; I've added it to the legal blocker. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #10 from Richard W.M. Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:23:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Does not build in my F8 mock: ERROR: Bad build req: No Package Found for ocaml-bitstring-devel = 1.9.7. I think it will work if you install ocaml-bitstring 1.9.7 from F8 updates-testing: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-6564 Also does not work on my F8 xen machine: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# virt-uname Fatal error: exception Failure(Domain-0: use -W to define word size for this image) Currently it doesn't detect architectures correctly. Very easy to fix, and will be done in a future release, but in the meantime you need to do, for example: virt-uname -A i386 -T i386 Is it possible to make it usable for current stable xen distribution (F8)? It should build on F8 with the updated ocaml-bitstring. Here is an F8 package for x86-64 that I just built on an F8 machine: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/virt-mem-0.2.9-3.fc8.x86_64.rpm http://www.annexia.org/tmp/virt-mem-0.2.9-3.fc8.src.rpm By the way, for general build/usage questions, you might want to post to this list: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458543] Review Request: eg - a wrapper for Git
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458543
Till Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #2 from Till Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:24:34 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
eg.spec:61: E: use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR
You use $RPM_SOURCE_DIR or %{_sourcedir} in your spec file. If you have to
use
a directory for building, use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead.
It's kind of rare to see $RPM_SOURCE_DIR used like that; wouldn't it just be
easier to install %{SOURCE0} directly?
Imho it the source should be copied to the build-dir in %setup, therefore
instead of
cp $RPM_SOURCE_DIR/%{name} $RPM_BUILD_DIR/%{name}-%{version}
this would be better in %prep:
cp -p %SOURCE0 .
I did not test it, but imho it should work. Also note the -p to preserve the
timestamp.
When %SOURCE0 would be directly installed in %install, then it make much more
work to create a patch, e.g. I normally run make prep, create the patch and use
make patch SUFFIX=foo in Fedora CVS.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #11 from Richard W.M. Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:25:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Is it possible to make it usable for current stable xen distribution (F8)? Sorry, I also notice that you're using Xen. At the moment libvirt only supports memory peeking for KVM guests. We plan to implement this for Xen too (it is, after all, relatively simple to do under Xen), but there is no support in libvirt right at the moment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458397] Review Request: python-paver - Python-based build/distribution/deployment scripting tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458397 Toshio Kuratomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Toshio Kuratomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:28:56 EDT --- Spec URL: http://toshio.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-paver.spec SRPM URL: http://toshio.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-paver-0.8.1-2.fc9.src.rpm %check section added and python-nose is now a BuildRequire. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #12 from Jan ONDREJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:38:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) (In reply to comment #9) I think it will work if you install ocaml-bitstring 1.9.7 from F8 updates-testing: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-6564 I think you should request move to stable for this package. It's harder to install this in my mock environment. Currently it doesn't detect architectures correctly. Very easy to fix, and will be done in a future release, but in the meantime you need to do, for example: virt-uname -A i386 -T i386 OK. As I am using xen, this does not help. By the way, for general build/usage questions, you might want to post to this list: I can build it, just if package need to be approved, it must build in mock/koji. I think we need this for F8 too. I am interested in this package only if it will work for F8 xen. Although reviewer not must test package functionality, my interests are different. If you patch it to work with xen paravirtualized guests, please let me know and I will make a review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #13 from Richard W.M. Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 10:43:59 EDT --- Xen support needs changes to libvirt. virt-mem itself won't be affected - it just uses the virDomainMemoryPeek[1] call from libvirt and hence just uses whatever libvirt supports. [1] http://libvirt.org/html/libvirt-libvirt.html#virDomainMemoryPeek -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458397] Review Request: python-paver - Python-based build/distribution/deployment scripting tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458397 Toshio Kuratomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Toshio Kuratomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 11:22:10 EDT --- Sorry about unsetting assigned and status. The new bugzilla didn't warn me of a Mid-Air Collision with that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 421241] Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=421241 --- Comment #55 from Jess Portnoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 12:19:54 EDT --- OK, I would love to hear to reason for this patch someday but it seems in that case it is indeed useless :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 446847] Review Request: nagios-plugins-check_sip - A Nagios plugin to check SIP servers and devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446847 --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 12:34:10 EDT --- Ver. 1.2-2 %changelog * Sun Aug 10 2008 Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.2-2 - Fixed issue with multiarch http://peter.fedorapeople.org/nagios-plugins-check_sip.spec http://peter.fedorapeople.org/nagios-plugins-check_sip-1.2-2.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458397] Review Request: python-paver - Python-based build/distribution/deployment scripting tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458397 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 12:48:19 EDT --- Cool, thanks. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456182] Review Request: rssh - Restricted shell for use with OpenSSH, allowing only scp and/or sftp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456182 --- Comment #7 from Debarshi Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 13:12:45 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=313897) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=313897) Patch to incorporate Spec file fixes. (In reply to comment #6) http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/rssh.spec http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/rssh-2.3.2-3.fc10.src.rpm + The example scripts provided as documentation should not have their executable bits set. + https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Libexecdir suggests that files be put into package-specific subdirectories. Can this be done? + The %pre scriptlet does not follow the guidelines for users and groups (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups). You need to add 'Requires(pre): shadow-utils' and the scriptlet needs to end with an 'exit 0'. I think '|| :' also has the same effect as 'exit 0', but you might want to be pedantic and be safe. + You have mistakenly put fish instead of rssh in the Spec comments. + You might want to split the %doc in multiple lines to achieve the 72/80 character rule. But it is a matter of style and upto you. + As I had mentioned earlier, the rssh(1) manual recommends: # chown root:rsshuser rssh rssh_chroot_helper # chmod 550 rssh # chmod 4550 rssh_chroot_helper Please find attached a patch which incorporates these changes. I have deliberately not bumped the release and added a %changelog. It is your package update them as you deem fit. These changes lead to the following rpmlint issues (which can be ignored): $ rpmlint rssh rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-gid /usr/bin/rssh rsshusers rssh.x86_64: E: non-readable /usr/bin/rssh 0750 rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/rssh 0750 rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-gid /usr/libexec/rssh_chroot_helper rsshusers rssh.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/libexec/rssh_chroot_helper root 04750 rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/libexec/rssh_chroot_helper 04750 rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/libexec/rssh_chroot_helper 04750 rssh.x86_64: E: no-binary rssh.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%postun mv $ However using -i reveals some interesting avenues: + You might want to add /usr/bin/rssh to the list of files which are not readable by everyone in Fedora. rssh.x86_64: E: non-readable /usr/bin/rssh 0750 The file can't be read by everybody. If this is expected (for security reasons), contact your rpmlint distributor to get it added to the list of exceptions for your distro (or add it to your local configuration if you installed rpmlint from the source tarball). + Can we have rssusers as a standard group in Fedora? rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-gid /usr/bin/rssh rsshusers A file in this package is owned by a non standard group. Standard groups are: root, bin, daemon, sys, adm, tty, disk, lp, mem, kmem, wheel, mail, news, uucp, man, games, gopher, dip, ftp, lock, nobody, users rssh.x86_64: E: non-standard-gid /usr/libexec/rssh_chroot_helper rsshusers A file in this package is owned by a non standard group. Standard groups are: root, bin, daemon, sys, adm, tty, disk, lp, mem, kmem, wheel, mail, news, uucp, man, games, gopher, dip, ftp, lock, nobody, users -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458245] Review Request: python-markdown - Markdown implementation in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458245 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 13:42:00 EDT --- Thanks; this looks fine. * source files match upstream: 1d11859f79bcf502572ad9e582dbed827f8fca3b6379173a283bc3080a0578d8 markdown-1.7.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: python-markdown = 1.7-1.fc10 = /usr/bin/python python(abi) = 2.5 * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458588] Review Request: qsstv - Qt-based slow-scan TV and fax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458588
--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:04:40 EDT
---
I'm not quite sure why you have the alphatag and such in the version. It looks
to me as if this is a post-release update, not a prerelease paackage. If so,
why not just use an NVR like qsstv-5.23c-1%{?dist} ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457517] Review Request: perl-Padre - Perl Application Development and Refactoring Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457517 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: perl-Padre |Review Request: perl-Padre ||- Perl Application ||Development and Refactoring ||Environment -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:10:59 EDT --- Is Peter actually reviewing this package? It's assigned to him but he's made no comments and the fedora-review flag is empty. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458407] Review Request: ibus-anthy - anthy engine for IBus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458407 Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:14:42 EDT --- It has been built in koji. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435015] Review Request: libGPP4 - LGPL CCP4 library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435015 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458409] Review Request: ibus-pinyin - PinYin engine for IBus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458409 Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:13:37 EDT --- It has been built in koji. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458248] Review Request: ibus-m17n - m17n engine for IBus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458248 Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:14:50 EDT --- It has been built in koji. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 442914] Review Request: eg - Git for mere mortals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442914 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #8 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:13:35 EDT --- *** Bug 458543 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458543] Review Request: eg - a wrapper for Git
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458543 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:13:35 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 442914 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458238] Review Request: ibus - An input bus for Linux.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458238 Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #7 from Huang Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:15:03 EDT --- It has been built in koji. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454220] Review Request: germanium - a download manager for eMusic.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454220 Matt Good [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #22 from Matt Good [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:15:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) Before I make a package for 0.2.2, I should point out that the emusic format seems to have changed. The file extension is now .emx, which is an XML format, replacing the previous encrypted one. Some details are here: http://code.google.com/p/emusicremote/wiki/EMX_File_Format Yes, I've seen the EMX format, though by default eMusic still uses the EMP format since this is what's supported by their official clients. The new eMusic Remote client that uses EMX is still pre-release with no releases since Oct. 2007, so I haven't bothered updating this client yet, though the eMusic lib I'm planning would support EMX. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435016] Review Request: mmdb - MMDB coordinate library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435016 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458588] Review Request: qsstv - Qt-based slow-scan TV and fax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458588
--- Comment #2 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:29:00 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #1)
It looks
to me as if this is a post-release update, not a prerelease paackage. If so,
why not just use an NVR like qsstv-5.23c-1%{?dist} ?
Yes this is a post-release, I've corrected the files:
http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/qsstv.spec
http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/qsstv-5.3c-1.fc9.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435543] Review Request: gridloc - A ncurses console application for the calculation of Maidenhead QRA Locators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435543 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:28:47 EDT --- I sure hope Bob's OK. I'll take a look at this. Fist thing I notice is that the tarball in the package doesn't match the tarball at the upstream URL. It seems that the upstream tarball lacks the COPYING file and there are a couple of inconsequential changes in the documentation. Any idea what's happened there? Otherwise the packaging seems fine, but after building this (on x86_64 rawhide), I can't get it to do anything other than segfault. Does it require the config file to be set up first? X source files don't match upstream. * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: gridloc = 0.6-4.fc10 gridloc(x86-64) = 0.6-4.fc10 = libform.so.5()(64bit) libncurses.so.5()(64bit) libtinfo.so.5()(64bit) ? %check is not present. I tried to test this manually but all it seems to do is segfault. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435835] Review Request: perl-RPC-XML - Set of classes for core data, message and XML handling
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435835 --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:34:04 EDT --- Last comment from the submitter was over two months ago. Setting NEEDINFO; I will close this ticket soon if there is no response. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454220] Review Request: germanium - a download manager for eMusic.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454220 --- Comment #23 from Adam Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:49:24 EDT --- Fair enough. I only mentioned it because the last download I made it defaulted to .emx. Just had a look and it's back to .emp - perhaps they're rolling it out gradually. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 408941] Review Request: Unicornscan - Scalable, Accurate, Flexible, and Efficient Network Probing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=408941 --- Comment #14 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:45:08 EDT --- ping again? Since the submitter din not reply for 7 months, this is the last appeal before marking the ticket as deadreview. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458598] New: Review Request: snowballz - a fun RTS game featuring snowball fights with penguins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: snowballz - a fun RTS game featuring snowball fights with penguins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458598 Summary: Review Request: snowballz - a fun RTS game featuring snowball fights with penguins Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://packages.cassmodiah.de/fedora/snowballz/bugzilla/snowballz.spec SRPM URL: http://packages.cassmodiah.de/fedora/snowballz/bugzilla/snowballz-0.9.5.1-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Take command of your army of penguins as you blaze your path to victory! March through snow laden forests to conqueror new frontears and grow your small army. Ambush enemy lines with blasts of freezing snowballs. But don't neglect your home, invaders are just over the next snow drift! Gather fish for your cold penguins to munch on as they warm up in your cozy igloo. It's a snowy world you don't want to miss! Requires Rabbyt Bug #458345 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458345 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453703] Review Request: trilinos - A collection of libraries of numerical algorithms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453703 --- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:58:26 EDT --- Any update from upstream? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435543] Review Request: gridloc - A ncurses console application for the calculation of Maidenhead QRA Locators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435543 --- Comment #17 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 14:59:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) Fist thing I notice is that the tarball in the package doesn't match the tarball at the upstream URL. It seems that the upstream tarball lacks the COPYING file and there are a couple of inconsequential changes in the documentation. Any idea what's happened there? Upstream lacks of storage space .. last time he released new version and removed the previous ones, now I believe he didn't bother to make a new release he just repacked gridloc, he mainly just releases bugfixes. I will contact him once again ... ? %check is not present. I tried to test this manually but all it seems to do is segfault. I cannot reproduce this under F9 (i386 or x86_64), it should work fine (if you do not have the config file .gridlocrc (there is a sample in docdir) it should complain about it and exit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458345] Review Request: python-rabbyt - sprite library for Python with game development in mind
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458345 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||458598 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458598] Review Request: snowballz - a fun RTS game featuring snowball fights with penguins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458598 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||458345 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456182] Review Request: rssh - Restricted shell for use with OpenSSH, allowing only scp and/or sftp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456182 Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #8 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 15:19:44 EDT --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rp rssh-2.3.2-3.fc10.src.rpm rssh.src: W: strange-permission rssh-2.3.2.tar.gz 0755 rssh.src: W: strange-permission rssh.spec 0755 rssh.src: W: strange-permission rssh-2.3.2-makefile.patch 0755 755 is bad 664 will be okay. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435543] Review Request: gridloc - A ncurses console application for the calculation of Maidenhead QRA Locators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435543 --- Comment #18 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 15:27:05 EDT --- I have difficulty believing that an open source project which is so small can lack storage space these days. There are so many places (even Fedora) which will give storage space for free. In any case, certainly see a segfault, but things are quite fine when I run under gdb and I get the complaint about the missing .gridlocrc file. And amazingly, if I run it under zsh, I get the expected complaint while running it under bash gives the segfault. Bizarre. I'm going to assume this is some artifact of the chroot setup I run in for testing things. Let me know when you've sorted out the upstream tarball issue. Or just spin a new package with a fresh tarball. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453839] Review Request: phatch - photo batch processor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453839
--- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 15:51:46 EDT
---
This rpmlint complaint:
phatch.src:76: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package
%{_libdir}/nautilus/extensions-1.0/python/%{name}_*
is an absolute blocker.
If you build this noarch package on x86_64, you'll get files in /usr/lib64,
which doesn't even exist on a 32-bit machine. I do not know what the proper
solution is; if nautilus really has no place to put arch-independent extensions
then I suppose this package can't be noarch.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454687] Review Request: perl-Mail-ClamAV - Perl extension for the clamav virus scanner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454687 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |perl-Mail-ClamAV - Perl |perl-Mail-ClamAV - Perl |extension for the clamav|extension for the clamav |virus scanner |virus scanner --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 16:18:51 EDT --- This is standard Perl module, but a couple of things bother me. If you visit the upstream URL, you can't see version 0.22, just 0.13. If you search for ClamAV on CPAN you'll see a link to 0.22, but clicking there gets you a page with a big red UNAUTHORIZED warning. What's that about? When running the tests, I see the following: (in cleanup) panic: free from wrong pool. which is kind of troubling. I see no problems with the packaging, but I'm reluctant to approve this without some discussion of those two issues. * source files match upstream: 1927671296cd398a1b0ce3102683ed23e78648fc9dd643a8fab92d18e33b010b Mail-ClamAV-0.22.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: ClamAV.so()(64bit) perl(Mail::ClamAV) = 0.22 perl(Mail::ClamAV::Status) perl-Mail-ClamAV = 0.22-1.fc10 perl-Mail-ClamAV(x86-64) = 0.22-1.fc10 = libclamav.so.4()(64bit) libclamav.so.4(CLAMAV_PUBLIC)(64bit) perl = 0:5.006001 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Carp) perl(Class::Struct) perl(Exporter) perl(IO::Handle) perl(Inline) perl(Inline) = 0.44 perl(strict) perl(warnings) * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=10, 2 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr 0.00 sys + 1.58 cusr 0.12 csys = 1.71 CPU) (discounting the weird panic at the end) * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454220] Review Request: germanium - a download manager for eMusic.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454220 --- Comment #24 from Adam Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 16:25:22 EDT --- New version available at: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/review/germanium/germanium.spec http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/review/germanium/germanium-0.2.2-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455507] Review Request: jsmin - JavaScript minifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455507 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 16:29:13 EDT --- I don't know if the issue of the weird license was ever resolved on-list; blocking FE-Legal to hopefully get a clear statement in this ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458245] Review Request: python-markdown - Markdown implementation in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458245 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Moschny [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 16:30:47 EDT --- Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-markdown Short Description: Markdown implementation in Python Owners: thm Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: none Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438811] Review Request: php-pear-HTML-AJAX - PHP and JavaScript AJAX library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438811 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440560] Review Request: openssl098b - The OpenSSL toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440560 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 16:36:19 EDT --- It's been over a month since the last ping with no response; setting NEEDINFO. I'll close ticket soon if there is no response. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 449037] Review Request: afio - cpio compatible archiver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449037
--- Comment #4 from Debarshi Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 16:54:48 EDT
---
Created an attachment (id=313898)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=313898)
Patch to fix warnings and deprecated code.
MUST Items:
xx - rpmlint is unclean on RPM
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]$ rpmlint afio-2.5-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script2/restore
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script3/gnupg_read
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script3/pgp_read
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script3/pgp_write
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script4/tapechange
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script3/gnupg_write
afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script2/backup
afio.x86_64: W: doc-file-dependency
/usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script2/backup /bin/bash
[EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]$
OK - follows Naming Guidelines
OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec
xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines
+ Broken Source tag. Use the URL publised by upstream:
http://freshmeat.net/redir/afio/144/url_tgz/afio-2.5.tgz
+ The description should be slightly more verbose than the summary. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description
You can consider using the following paragraph from the README file:
Afio makes cpio-format archives. It deals somewhat gracefully with
input data corruption. Supports multi-volume archives during
interactive operation. Afio can make compressed archives that are
much safer than compressed tar or cpio archives. Afio is best used as
an `archive engine' in a backup script.
+ It might be a good idea to add a check stanza and run 'make regtest' and
'make regtest2gb' in it.
+ According to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps you
should use 'install -p'.
+ The ANNOUNCE-2.5 file contains useful information. It should be added to
%doc in the %files stanza.
+ The ChangeLog file contains no useful information. It should not be
distributed.
+ According to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Documentation the
INSTALLATION file should not be distributed.
+ The Dist tag (ie. fc9) should not be a part of the %changelog entry. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs
OK - license meets Licensing Guidelines
?? - License field meets actual license
+ The header in afio.c says:
This software package can also be re-distributed under
particular conditions that are _weaker_ than the Perl Artistic
License combined with the GNU Library General Public License.
Redistribution need only satisfy all four license notices below.
I am not sure how this might affect the License tag. Need to verify.
OK - upstream license file included in %doc
+ The perl.artistic.license file might need to be distributed.
OK - spec file uses American English
OK - spec file is legible
+ You might want to split the %doc in multiple lines to achieve the 72/80
character rule. But it is a matter of style and upto you.
xx - sources match upstream sources
+ The MD5SUM does not match.
Tarball found in SRPM:
70fd825bd8af83473eb52d140df84cc3
Upstream sources from
http://freshmeat.net/redir/afio/144/url_tgz/afio-2.5.tgz:
8c6665e0f875dcd8e1bdb18644b59688
OK - package builds successfully
+ You could consider using the attached patch to fix warnings and
deprecated code.
Getting the patch upstream should be the final goal.
OK - ExcludeArch not needed
OK - build dependencies correctly listed
OK - no locales
OK - no shared libraries
OK - package is not relocatable
OK - file and directory ownership
OK - no duplicates in %file
xx - file permissions set properly
+ The scripts in %doc should not have their executable bits set.
+ The preferred attribute definition is: %defattr(-,root,root,-)
OK - %clean present
OK - macros used consistently
OK - contains code and permissable content
OK - -doc is not needed
OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime
OK - no header files
OK - no static libraries
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no library files
OK - -devel is not needed
OK - no libtool archives
OK - %{name}.desktop file not needed
OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages
OK - buildroot correctly prepped
OK - all file names valid UTF-8
SHOULD Items:
OK - upstream provides license text
OK - translations for description and summary
OK - package
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #15 from Richard W.M. Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 17:06:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) Is Peter actually reviewing this package? It's assigned to him but he's made no comments and the fedora-review flag is empty. I swapped Peter for a couple of his bugs, but those are stalled because I couldn't build them in Rawhide. Feel free to take over this review if you feel inclined :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458610] New: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql - PostgreSQL MDB2 driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql - PostgreSQL MDB2 driver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458610 Summary: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql - PostgreSQL MDB2 driver Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql.spec SRPM URL: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql-1.4.1-1.fc9.src.rpm Mock Log: http://odysseus.x-tnd.be/fedora/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql/php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql-build.log Description: This is the PostgreSQL MDB2 driver. rpmlint against srpm complains about a patch non apllied, I think it's just because the path is applied once installed (bug #379081). rpmlint against rpm also complains about missing documentation, there is no documentation provided upstream for this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458610] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql - PostgreSQL MDB2 driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458610 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 17:28:44 EDT --- *** Bug 438805 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438805] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql - PostgreSQL driver for MDB2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438805 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Blocks|177841 | Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 17:28:44 EDT --- Well, this has been sitting for ages, and there's someone around who wants to get this into the distro, so I'm just going to close this ticket and review the other one. If you really want to maintain this package, consider contacting the other maintainer once you've been sponsored. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 458610 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 450713] Review Request: virt-mem - Management tools for virtual machines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450713 --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 17:44:31 EDT --- Well, if I actually check the bug history, I see that he just took this ticket on Friday, and I certainly shouldn't be complaining about non-response after two days. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444235] Review Request: djview4 - DjVu viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444235
Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 18:30:09 EDT
---
Builds fine and rpmlint is silent.
I note that the compiler is called properly everywhere except when compiling
nsdejavu.c. However, the plugin isn't actually installed by this package, so
I'm not going to worry about it. However, if in the future you decide to turn
on the plugin, you'll have several things to look at. (The licensing is
different, for one thing.)
Your scriptlets seem to be missing the
if [ -x %{_bindir}/gtk-update-icon-cache ] ; then
%{_bindir}/gtk-update-icon-cache --quiet %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor || :
fi
part. See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#GTK.2B_icon_cache
* source files match upstream:
a783c3700f32d31b0a2a8662d5e2abcd1b4ab3cc129543daaa8af9211135e911
djview4-4.3.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
? compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
djview4 = 4.3-1.fc10
djview4(x86-64) = 4.3-1.fc10
=
/bin/sh
libQtCore.so.4()(64bit)
libQtGui.so.4()(64bit)
libQtNetwork.so.4()(64bit)
libX11.so.6()(64bit)
libXext.so.6()(64bit)
libdjvulibre.so.15()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libjpeg.so.62()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit)
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I have not tested this
package.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
X scriptlets missing icon cache update.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.
* desktop files valid and installed properly.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456353 Brian Pepple [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called VT100-compatible terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458408 --- Comment #4 from Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 18:45:25 EDT --- Updated: - Update source url Spec URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest.spec SRPM URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest-20071216-3.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458610] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql - PostgreSQL MDB2 driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458610 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 18:52:15 EDT --- Indeed, rpmlint complains about the two things you've pointed out; I agree that both complaints can be ignored. The only thing I could suggest you add is some statement of why the file has to be patched after installation instead if in %prep as usual. (I understand why but it might not be obvious to whoever might glance at the spec in the future.) * source files match upstream: 7a051e90c63897701a93c9d3b02d79e6c696240c552694cf34cbc7eab6284691 MDB2_Driver_pgsql-1.4.1.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream (it's in each of the PHP files). * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: php-pear(MDB2_Driver_pgsql) = 1.4.1 php-pear-MDB2-Driver-pgsql = 1.4.1-1.fc10 = /bin/sh /usr/bin/pear php-pear(MDB2) = 2.4.1 php-pear(PEAR) * %check is not present; there's a test suite, but it would require a running postgres instance and pear tests aren't runnable at build time in any case. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets are OK (pear module registration). * code, not content. * no documentation to worry about. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457109] Review-Request: perl-TAP-Harness-JUnit - Generate JUnit compatible output from TAP results
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457109 Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review-Request: |Review-Request: |perl-TAP-Harness-JUnit -|perl-TAP-Harness-JUnit - |Generate JUnit compatible |Generate JUnit compatible |output from TAP results |output from TAP results --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 18:57:09 EDT --- I note that upstream has updated this package twice since this ticket was opened, but I guess you know that since you're the upstream. Should we wait for an updated package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458397] Review Request: python-paver - Python-based build/distribution/deployment scripting tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458397 --- Comment #5 from Toshio Kuratomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 18:59:50 EDT --- Thanks tibbs! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-paver Short Description: Python-based build/distribution/deployment scripting tool Owners: toshio lmacken Branches: F-8 F-9 devel EL-5 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456353 --- Comment #1 from Brian Pepple [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 19:03:01 EDT --- Good: * Source URL is canonical * Upstream source tarball verified * Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines * Group Tag is from the official list * Valid license tag * Buildroot has all required elements * All paths begin with macros * Files have appropriate permissions and owners Bad: * Fails to build in Mock. Your missing a BuildRequires on expat-devel. * rpmlint produces the following: ffado.x86_64: W: no-documentation ffado.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/libffado/tests/test-dbus ffado.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/libffado/tests/test-isorecv-1 ffado.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/libffado/tests/test-isoxmit-1 ffado.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/libffado/tests/teststreaming3 ffado.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/libffado/tests/test-dbus-server ffado.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/libffado/tests/test-ffado libffado.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/libffado-2.0/NEWS libffado.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/libffado-2.0/TODO libffado.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libffado.so libffado-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 3 warnings. The documentation warning can be ignored, since you've got the relevant documention in the main package, though I would drop the NEWS TODO files since they don't contain anything. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454997] Review Request: ircii - Popular Unix Irc client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454997 Brian Pepple [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Brian Pepple [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-10 19:10:11 EDT --- Do you still wish to submit this package to Fedora? The links you provided are currently dead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
