[Bug 463400] New: Review Request: xmmsctrl - command line control utility for xmms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xmmsctrl - command line control utility for xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463400 Summary: Review Request: xmmsctrl - command line control utility for xmms 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://6mata.com:8014/xmmsctrl/xmmsctrl.spec SRPM URL: http://6mata.com:8014/xmmsctrl/xmmsctrl-1.8-2.src.rpm Description: xmmsctrl is a small utility to control xmms from the command line. Its goal is to be used coupled with sh to test xmms state and perform an appropriate action, e.g. if playing then pause else play. The interest of this is to bind keys in a window manager to have control over xmms with keys that do play/next/pause, prev, control sound... This is my first package and I am seeking a sponsor. -- 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 463400] Review Request: xmmsctrl - command line control utility for xmms
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=463400 Orcan Ogetbil [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 461432] Review Request: clutter-gtkmm - C++ wrapper for clutter-gtk 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=461432 Denis Leroy [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #5 from Denis Leroy [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 03:00:18 EDT --- Mamoru-san, thanks for the 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 463316] Review Request: hunspell-wa - Walloon hunspell dictionaries
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=463316 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 03:12:16 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hunspell-wa Short Description: Walloon hunspell dictionaries Owners: caolanm Branches: InitialCC: -- 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 Bruno Cornec [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 463321] Review Request: hunspell-uz - Uzbek hunspell dictionaries
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=463321 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 03:11:53 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hunspell-uz Short Description: Uzbek hunspell dictionaries Owners: caolanm Branches: InitialCC: -- 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 187317] Review Request: mindi
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=187317 Bruno Cornec [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Comment #36 from Bruno Cornec [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 03:35:20 EDT --- I fixed some remaining mode issues recently. Latest version is at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/fedora/9/mindi-2.0.4-1.fc9.src.rpm and SPEC at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/fedora/9/mindi.spec Still looking for evolution on that if you still want it to be included. -- 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 187318] Review Request: mondo
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=187318 --- Comment #35 from Bruno Cornec [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 03:39:39 EDT --- The latest version to look at is under: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/fedora/9/mondo-2.2.7-1.fc9.src.rpm SPEC: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/fedora/9/mondo.spec -- 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 225918] Merge Review: iso-codes
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=225918 --- Comment #11 from Parag [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 04:33:17 EDT --- Ville, I have opened ACLs now. Feel free to commit your patch as I am unable to download new source release 3.3. I see ftp release directory contains no release tarballs now. looks like upstream ftp maintainance issue to me. -- 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 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator
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=456190 --- Comment #14 from Andrea Musuruane [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 05:03:21 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) hi, I am not sure how this should be done, iconv needs to know what the file format is, and there doesnt seem to be any type that matches: troff or preprocessor input text ASCII Pascal program text Non-ISO extended-ASCII English text, with LF, NEL line terminators I haven't looked at the file but most files are usually ISO 8859-1. Russian ones should be ISO 8859-5. Try to convert them and see if the results make sense. The other warnings might be ok, I don't know I can set the symbolic links with a relative path, and dosemu would never run chroot anyways. Ehm... no, I don't think they are OK. Search for a solution in Fedora CVS. Moreover, Source URL is missing: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net I read in COPYING.DOSEMU: Parts of the code not covered by the GPL are marked explicitly within the code, and the copyrights are also at the end of this file. The rest of the code is covered by the GPL. Therefore you should update License tag accordingly: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios Bye, Andrea. -- 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 454102] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Model-XMLRPC - XMLRPC model class for Catalyst
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=454102
--- Comment #8 from Miroslav Suchy [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 05:28:28 EDT
---
You point to wrong src.rpm (-1 release) so I tried to download
http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Catalyst-Model-XMLRPC-0.04-2.fc9.src.rpm
and it was there. So I'm using this in this comments.
The [2] is ok. You are now using Patch0:
But the [1] is still problem, you just mask the problem so rpmlint do not
detect it. I do not understand why do you have this part there at all:
# note we first filter out the bits in _docdir...
cat \EOF %{name}-prov
#!/bin/sh
FOO=`perl -p -e 's|%{broot}%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}\S+||'`
%{__perl_provides} $FOO
EOF
%define __perl_provides
%{_builddir}/Catalyst-Model-XMLRPC-%{version}/%{name}-prov
chmod +x %{__perl_provides}
If I delete this lines and this one from %files:
%doc Changes README t/
will replace with
%doc Changes README
I got the same output (with same provides).
You should not install content of t/ dir anyway.
--
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 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator
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=456190
--- Comment #15 from Andrea Musuruane [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 05:41:41
EDT ---
Watching closely your new spec file I noticed other things:
* %configure --with-fdtarball=%{SOURCE1} is enough to set prefix and mandir
(and a lot other things)
To understand this, try:
$ rpm --eval='%configure'
* %setup -q should be enough. Your %setup -q -T -b 0 doesn't make sense:
http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-macros.html
* Release tag is still not correct:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Package_Release
* I suggest you to explicit the desktop file in %files in this way:
%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
It is much more readable than:
%{_datadir}/applications/*
* I don't think this is needed.
BuildRequires: binutils
Otherwise please explain.
* Have you tried building the RPM in mock to test your dependencies?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/MockTricks
* Forget my previous comment about Source URL, but I really want to know why
you are packaging a development version. What are pro's and con's compared to
the latest stable version?
* As Rahul said, you should really need to follow this guide to get sponsored:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored
You only seems to comment on this bug. This is not enough to find a sponsor and
get sponsored.
--
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 463415] New: Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463415 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries 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://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-sq.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-sq-1.6-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Albanian hunspell dictionaries -- 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 461131] Review Request: sim - Simple Instant Messenger
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=461131 --- Comment #17 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 05:35:50 EDT --- I rebuilt your srpm with one error. I assume zip should be added into build requires. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=838397name=build.log -- 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 462381] Review Request: beediff - Visual tool for comparing and merging 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=462381 --- Comment #3 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 06:03:20 EDT --- Everything seems fine, except for setting a vendor_id in the desktop-install. Please fix that too and I'll approve the 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 460867] Review Request: perl-ORLite - Extremely light weight SQLite-specific ORM
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=460867 --- Comment #13 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 06:23:50 EDT --- http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLite.spec http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLite-0.11-3.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 463415] Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries
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=463415 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 06:30:35 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=838524 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. 4709aa9d2dd201f2cc2bab9c29112370 myspell-sq_AL-1.6.zip + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480 --- Comment #18 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 07:11:45 EDT --- You persuaded me :) Here is package with bcond http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/tclx/tclx-8.4.0-11.fc10.src.rpm http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/tclx/tclx.spec -- 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 460867] Review Request: perl-ORLite - Extremely light weight SQLite-specific ORM
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=460867 --- Comment #14 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 07:22:06 EDT --- Hm, updated for the latest version of Padre http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLite.spec http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-ORLite/perl-ORLite-0.13-1.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 450371] Review Request: sigen - Strategy/RPG game engine
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=450371 Ben Boeckel [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #53 from Ben Boeckel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 08:40:27 EDT --- Pushed to Bodhi this morning. Closing. -- 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 447844] Review Request: krazy2 - KDE code checking 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=447844 Ben Boeckel [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #21 from Ben Boeckel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 08:39:44 EDT --- Just did it this morning (was away for the weekend). Closing. -- 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 458139] Review Request: ruby-pam - Ruby bindings for pam
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=458139 --- Comment #12 from Bryan Kearney [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 09:10:23 EDT --- Thank you for the review! I tested this by removing the link in /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/pam-1.5.2/lib/pam.so and when launching with irb -rubygems I got an error when I attempted to require pam. I then modified the library itself to be pam.so instead of pam.1.5.2.so. This allowed the gem to install but also allowed this to work irb -rpam with only the gem install which I believe is incorrect. So, if the usage of the softlink in the gem directory to the arch directory is not allowed then I will look to add a single ruby file which loads up the versioned library. This seems like the best solution of meeting the rpm needs and the gem needs. Any concerns with this approach? -- 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 463436] New: Review Request: pidgin-facebookchat - libpurple plug-in supporting facebook IM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pidgin-facebookchat - libpurple plug-in supporting facebook IM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463436 Summary: Review Request: pidgin-facebookchat - libpurple plug-in supporting facebook IM 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://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pidgin-facebookchat.spec SRPM URL: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pidgin-facebookchat-1.35-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: This is a Facebook chat plugin for Pidgin and libpurple messengers. It connects to the new Facebook Chat IM service without the need for an API key. Currently the plugin can log into the Facebook servers, grab the buddy list, send/receive messages, add/remove friends, receive notifications, search for Facebook friends and set your Facebook status. -- 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 430455] Review Request: gruler - GNOME screen ruler
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=430455 --- Comment #12 from Deji Akingunola [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 10:02:55 EDT --- Package Rename CVS Request === Old name: gruler New name: screenruler Short Description: GNOME screen ruler Owners: deji Branches: F-8 F-9 devel 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 463436] Review Request: pidgin-facebookchat - libpurple plug-in supporting facebook IM
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=463436 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-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 461428] Review Request: orsa - Orbit Reconstruction, Simulation and Analysis
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=461428 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 10:02:29 EDT --- orsa-0.7.0-2.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/orsa-0.7.0-2.fc8 -- 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 430455] Review Request: gruler - GNOME screen ruler
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=430455 Deji Akingunola [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Deji Akingunola [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 10:04:12 EDT --- Package Rename CVS Request === Old name: gruler New name: screenruler Short Description: GNOME screen ruler Owners: deji Branches: F-8 F-9 devel 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 216544] Review Request: libdvdread - Simple foundation for reading DVD video disks
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=216544 Rex Dieter [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Rex Dieter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 10:10:07 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libdvdread New Branches: EL-5 Updated EPEL Owners: rathann, rdieter Mailed Dominik, he's ok with comaintaining an EPEL branch. -- 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 462982] Review Request: buffer - General purpose buffer program
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=462982 manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #9 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 10:47:36 EDT --- I'll take care of this. For the moment there are a few issues: 1. major one: during compilation the mandatory gcc flags as imposed by Fedora (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags) are not used. Instead compilation is done with -Wall -O6 -fomit-frame-pointer 2. minor issues: - I see no point in applying all the debian patches. We have no need for the content of the debian folder. You do not package it, which is OK, but I would have adjusted the patches to better fit Fedora. Not a blocker, feel free to leave it as it is. - there is a missing s in the Summary(fr) line (des bande - des bandes) -- 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 463140] Review Request: dfu-util - USB Device Firmware Update 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=463140 Jaroslav Reznik [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 463140] Review Request: dfu-util - USB Device Firmware Update 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=463140 Jaroslav Reznik [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-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 225918] Merge Review: iso-codes
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=225918 Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 10:56:23 EDT --- Thanks, done and built, closing as approved: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=838912 I've had some trouble getting a file listing from the upstream FTP site as well but it worked for me a few minutes ago with Firefox. I've never succeeded to download the tarball with wget but got it every time with curl (could be related to file listing issues, dunno). -- 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 463123] Review Request: gnomint - Graphical x509 Certification Authority management 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=463123 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-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 459138] Review Request: ctemplate - A simple but powerful template language for 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=459138 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 11:29:51 EDT --- ctemplate-0.91-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ctemplate-0.91-3.fc9 -- 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 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #39 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 11:28:17 EDT --- Well, * This package itself is okay * Your another review request (bug 463123) needs some fixing, however good to some extent for review request process. --- This package (germanium) is APPROVED by mtasaka --- Please follow the procedure written on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join from Install the Client Tools (Koji) . Now I am sponsoring you. If you want to import this package into Fedora 8/9, you also have to look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT (after once you rebuilt this package on koji Fedora rebuilding system). If you have questions, please ask me. Removing NEEDSPONSOR. -- 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 459138] Review Request: ctemplate - A simple but powerful template language for 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=459138 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 11:30:43 EDT --- ctemplate-0.91-3.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ctemplate-0.91-3.fc8 -- 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 463140] Review Request: dfu-util - USB Device Firmware Update 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=463140 --- Comment #8 from Juha Tuomala [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 11:36:07 EDT --- kernel Opening USB Device 0x1d50:0x5119... Claiming USB DFU Runtime Interface... Determining device status: state = appIDLE, status = 0 Device really in Runtime Mode, send DFU detach request... Resetting USB... Opening USB Device... Found Runtime: [0x1d50:0x5119] devnum=40, cfg=0, intf=0, alt=3, name=kernel Claiming USB DFU Interface... Setting Alternate Setting ... Determining device status: state = dfuIDLE, status = 0 dfuIDLE, continuing Transfer Size = 0x1000 bytes_per_hash=39279 Starting download: [##] finished! state(2) = dfuIDLE, status(0) = No error condition is present Done! Resetting USB to switch back to runtime mode testing, it works fine. ... Transfer Size = 0x1000 bytes_per_hash=1069547 Starting download: [##] finished! state(2) = dfuIDLE, status(0) = No error condition is present Done! Resetting USB to switch back to runtime mode that was rootfs. after boot attempt, the kernel wont start either. $ arch;rpm -q dfu-util x86_64 dfu-util-0.1-0.5.20080922svn4662.fc9.i386 -- 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 454102] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Model-XMLRPC - XMLRPC model class for Catalyst
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=454102
--- Comment #9 from Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 11:43:33 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
But the [1] is still problem, you just mask the problem so rpmlint do not
detect it. I do not understand why do you have this part there at all:
[1] was a false positive by rpmlint. %{buildroot} isn't being used in %prep
so much as embedded into the provides filtering script... This is not an
error. Swizzling the value into %{broot} simply keeps rpmlint from wearning
about an error that isn't.
So long as rpm insists on doing provides/requires detection in %{_docdir}, it's
going to be easier and more consistent to prevent the content of that directory
from being scanned to begin with.
(As a side note, I didn't realize a RFE to remove %{_docdir} scannning from
autoprov/req hadn't been filed... filed now as bug 463461.)
--
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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:25:10 EDT --- Hi, all: I think this package is now okay, because SGI License B is now under MIT: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2008-September/msg00035.html -- 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 463415] Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries
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=463415 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:27:13 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hunspell-sq Short Description: Albanian hunspell dictionaries Owners: caolanm Branches: InitialCC: -- 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 461757] Review Request: libdwarf - library for producing and consuming DWARF debugging information
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=461757 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Cagney [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:27:03 EDT --- I think I'm getting close: $ rpmlint libdwarf.spec libdwarf-0.20080818-4.fc9.src.rpm x86_64/libdwarf-0.20080818-4.fc9.x86_64.rpm x86_64/libdwarf-devel-0.20080818-4.fc9.x86_64.rpm x86_64/libdwarf-debuginfo-0.20080818-4.fc9.x86_64.rpm x86_64/libdwarf-dwarfdump-0.20080818-4.fc9.x86_64.rpm 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Per the changelog it: - creates a soname branded libdwarf.so.0 / libdwarf.so - it installs/soft-links same Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/cagney/libdwarf/libdwarf.spec Srpm URL: http://people.redhat.com/cagney/libdwarf/libdwarf-0.20080818-4.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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #13 from Tom spot Callaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:32:30 EDT --- Indeed. If someone wanted to reopen this and pursue review, I would lift the FE-Legal block. -- 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 463140] Review Request: dfu-util - USB Device Firmware Update 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=463140 --- Comment #9 from Juha Tuomala [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:34:10 EDT --- okay, at least on 32bit fedora9 it works if: - write kernel - write rootfs - switch off + unplug USB cable - boot booting straight from uboot does not work after rootfs download. -- 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 463140] Review Request: dfu-util - USB Device Firmware Update 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=463140 --- Comment #10 from Juha Tuomala [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:42:53 EDT --- Also note that for some reason I need to boot through the u-boot menu using AUX button before powering up the device. -- 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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #14 from Anthony Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 12:53:09 EDT --- We don't need to re-review this package do we? jogl was already in FC5 and FC6. I pulled it prior to 7 because of the licensing problem. It's currently in cvs as a dead.package. Let's just revive that package instead. Does somebody want to co-maintain this with me? -- 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 463436] Review Request: pidgin-facebookchat - libpurple plug-in supporting facebook IM
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=463436 --- Comment #1 from Matej Cepl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 13:00:23 EDT --- Some changes made according to assignees comments on IRC. Spec URL: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/purple-facebookchat.spec src.rpm: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/purple-facebookchat-1.35-3.fc10.src.rpm koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=839209 -- 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 463436] Review Request: purple-facebookchat - libpurple plug-in supporting facebook IM
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=463436 Matej Cepl [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |pidgin-facebookchat - |purple-facebookchat - |libpurple plug-in |libpurple plug-in |supporting facebook IM |supporting facebook IM -- 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 461131] Review Request: sim - Simple Instant Messenger
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=461131 --- Comment #18 from Pavel Alexeev [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 13:08:44 EDT --- Yes, you are right, thank you. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=838884 -- 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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 13:18:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) We don't need to re-review this package do we? jogl was already in FC5 and FC6. I pulled it prior to 7 because of the licensing problem. It's currently in cvs as a dead.package. Let's just revive that package instead. Does somebody want to co-maintain this with me? I can help with co-maintaining this package(along with gluegen) But despite the cvs creation side (If already done, no needs to re-do it); I would prefer to formally review this package: either I submit the review request or you (like it was originally done) -- 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 461007] Review Request: libftdi - Library to program and control the FTDI USB controller
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=461007 --- Comment #3 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 13:16:37 EDT --- new upstream update: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/libftdi.spec http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/libftdi-0.14-1.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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 13:25:19 EDT --- I think re-review of this package is needed. - Current Fedora guidelines says that more than 3 months old spec file needs re-review. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package_Procedure - Also Java guideline is established after F-8 (?) so FC6 based Java spec file needs update anyway IMO -- 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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #17 from Anthony Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 13:52:02 EDT --- Ok. I am not going to resubmit, but I'd be happy to review. BTW, upstream (Sun) is asking me: Question: in the short term, do we need to explicitly re-release the sources for JOGL 1.1.1 (*) with the old FreeB headers replaced with the new license? Or can Linux distributions use the existing sources? We have already transitioned our development to JOGL 2.0 and would prefer to make the license changes only in that branch. spot - we're OK with no upstream change, right? AG -- 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 457152] Review Request: appliance-tools tools for generating appliance images on Fedora
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=457152 David Huff [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- 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 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=439630 --- Comment #18 from Tom spot Callaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 14:00:34 EDT --- Yes, because of how FreeB is written, we're fine with no upstream header change. -- 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 463123] Review Request: gnomint - Graphical x509 Certification Authority management 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=463123 R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||463501 -- 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 463226] Review Request: Appliance Configuration Engine
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=463226 David Lutterkort [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added 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 463226] Review Request: Appliance Configuration Engine
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=463226
--- Comment #1 from David Lutterkort [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 15:02:18
EDT ---
OK - Package name
OK - License info is accurate
OK - License tag is correct and licenses are approved
OK - License files are installed as %doc
OK - Specfile name
OK - Specfile is legible
OK - No prebuilt binaries included
FIX - BuildRoot value (one of the recommended values)
Use one of the values listed here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
OK - PreReq not used
FIX - Source md5sum matches upstream
tarball is not available upstream; since you are upstream, you should
publish a tarball for every release
FIX - No hardcoded pathnames
instead of binHome, use %{_bindir}
instead of initHome, use %{_initrddir}
instead of /usr/share in aceHome use %{_datadir}
would prefer macro 'rubySiteHome' is called 'ruby_sitelibdir' for conistency
OK - Package owns all the files it installs
OK - 'Requires' create needed unowned directories
OK - Package builds successfully on i386 and x86_64 (mock)
OK - BuildRequires sufficient
OK - File permissions set properly
FIX - Macro usage is consistent
use install -p or cp -pr instead of %{__cp} -R
OK - rpmlint is silent
--
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 459444] Review Request: ctdb - Clustered TDB
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=459444 Chris Feist [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Chris Feist [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 15:54:19 EDT --- Everything looks good, now that the changes have been made. 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 463229] Review Request: ACE Banners Module
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=463229 --- Comment #1 from Bill Nottingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:05:18 EDT --- Is there a better way to package puppet recipes than this? It seems having umpteen subpackages isn't the way to go. -- 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 463226] Review Request: Appliance Configuration Engine
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=463226 --- Comment #2 from Bill Nottingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:17:17 EDT --- chckonfig usage is completely broken. Please see examples @ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#Initscripts_in_spec_file_scriptlets -- 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 451189] Review Request: rancid - Really Awesome New Cisco confIg Differ
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=451189 --- Comment #8 from Åge Olai Johnsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:19:42 EDT --- I've been busy the last couple of weeks but i've squeeze in a update here. Still working on the optflag-part. New spec and srpm: http://files.thaumaturge.org/users/dante/rancid/rancid-0.3.spec http://files.thaumaturge.org/users/dante/rancid/rancid-2.3.2-0.3.a8.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 463229] Review Request: ACE Banners Module
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=463229 --- Comment #2 from Bryan Kearney [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:23:56 EDT --- I would be happy to discuss real time to find on. The goal is to have the appliance ship with all the correct packages, and not have to call home at initial start up. For that reason, puppet is not used to require packages.. the spec file is. So each subpackage will have a puppet module, and a set of requires. -- 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 458139] Review Request: ruby-pam - Ruby bindings for pam
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=458139 --- Comment #13 from Bryan Kearney [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:22:00 EDT --- I have added a shim layer to the gem which in turn loads _pam which should pick up the libary from the arch load path. I followed the augeas pattern. As an aside, should this pattern be put into the packaging guidelines? New Spec File: http://bkearney.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-pam-1.5.3-1.fc9.src.rpm New SRPM: http://bkearney.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-pam.spec koji build clean one rpmlint warning for nodoc on ruby-pam (doc is in rugygem-pam) -- 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 459916] Review Request: freedink-dfarc - Frontend and .dmod installer for GNU FreeDink
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=459916
--- Comment #18 from Sylvain Beucler [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:35:49
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #14)
For 3.2-1
* Source0
- seems 404.
Fixed with new proper release.
* Dependency
- build.log shows:
--
140 checking for wxglade...
141 no
142 configure: WARNING: You need to install wxglade
--
Perhaps Requires: wxGlade is needed?
Clarified, this is a developer tool, only needed if you want to modify the UI
files.
* Timestamps
- Please consider to use
--
make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL=install -p
--
to keep timestamps on installed files as much as possible.
This method usually works for Makefiles generated from
recent autotools.
Done.
* Desktop file
- Any installed desktop files must be treated by
desktop-file-{install,validate}:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
Done.
* Scriptlets
- As a XML file is installed under %_datadir/mime/packages/,
mime data must be updated:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#mimeinfo
Done.
* Documents
- Please add ChangeLog to %doc. Also, doc/dfarc.txt can be added
to %doc.
I added ChangeLog. I didn't feel like including doc/dfarc.txt since it's
developer information.
* Directory ownership issue
- %_datadir/icons/hicolor (and directories under this directories) are
already owned by hicolor-icon-theme and should not be owned by
this package.
I think I fixed it by being more precise in the %files section:
-%{_datadir}/icons/*
+%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/32x32/mimetypes/*
* %changelog format
-
freedink-dfarc.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.2 3.2-1.fc10
-
- %changelog should contain EVR (Epoch-Version-Release) information
(not just Epoch-Version) (%dist information can be removed):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs
Oops, fixed.
http://www.freedink.org/snapshots/fedora-review/freedink-dfarc.spec
http://www.freedink.org/snapshots/fedora-review/freedink-dfarc-3.2.1-1.fc8.src.rpm
By the way, under F9 and mock, I keep getting rpmlint errors about g+w
directories:
freedink-dfarc.i386: E: non-standard-dir-perm
/usr/share/doc/freedink-dfarc-3.2.1 02755
A standard directory should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have wrong directory permissions in some dirs
included in your package.
Any clue?
--
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 463229] Review Request: ACE Banners Module
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=463229 --- Comment #3 from Bill Nottingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:40:46 EDT --- Right, but... - You've got these weird puppet modules that have initimate knowledge of the configuration details of their apps (file locations, etc.). Why not package them in some form with the app itself? How much will they need changed if the apps themselves change? - A separate source package for every single module you may want in a appliance sounds like bloat. Are they really intended to be released independently? -- 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 457916] Review Request: lmbench - lmbench benchmark tools
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=457916 --- Comment #4 from Eric Sandeen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:44:42 EDT --- looks like it's not picking up the O_DIRECT define ... also inthe packages above, all the man pages are landing in /usr/share/doc/lmbench-3.0a7/doc/ - not really where man pages should go. -Eric -- 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 216544] Review Request: libdvdread - Simple foundation for reading DVD video disks
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=216544 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:45:11 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 463316] Review Request: hunspell-wa - Walloon hunspell dictionaries
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=463316 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:43:01 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 463415] Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries
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=463415 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:44:05 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 430455] Review Request: gruler - GNOME screen ruler
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=430455 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #14 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:47:20 EDT --- Please follow the end of life procedure for the old package and file a new review request for the new package. If it's just a upstream name change the only changes you should need to make are the name and the Provides: and Obsoletes. -- 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 459915] Review Request: freedink-data - Adventure and role-playing game (data)
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=459915
--- Comment #6 from Sylvain Beucler [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 16:58:23
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
For 1.08.20080920-1:
* Licensing
- Well, from texts about licensing in source tarball all the
contents in the tarball are free.
However now the tag License: zlib (only) is no longer valid
as some more files are added as written in README-REPLACEMENTS.txt.
OK, should be good now:
License:zlib and CC-BY-SA and (GPLv3+ or Free Art or CC-BY-SA) and OAL
and Public Domain and CC-BY and GPLv2+
* Also adding files under licenses/ to %doc is necessary.
Is it OK to add the licenses/ directory directly?
* Macros
- Use macros for standard directories:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros
/usr must be %{_prefix}.
I missed that one.
* Timestamps
- As this package installs many files in the source tarball as they
are, keeping timestamps on those files is strongly recommended.
Please replace cp -r in Makefile to cp -pr or cp -a.
Fixed in GIT and applied as a patch to avoid a new 56M release.
* General rpmlint issue
---
W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/freedink-data-1.08.20080920/README-REPLACEMENTS.txt
W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/freedink-data-1.08.20080920/README.txt
---
- These files have CRLF line terminators, remove them
(sed -e 's|\r||' or dos2unix will do this).
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
OK, done.
Here are the new files:
http://www.freedink.org/snapshots/fedora-review/freedink-data.spec
http://www.freedink.org/snapshots/fedora-review/freedink-data-1.08.20080920-1.fc8.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 463316] Review Request: hunspell-wa - Walloon hunspell dictionaries
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=463316 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- 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 459908] Review Request: freedink - Adventure and role-playing game (engine)
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=459908
--- Comment #23 from Sylvain Beucler [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 17:12:28
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
For 1.08.20080920-1:
* Dependency between subpackages
- Generally speaking, dependencies between packages generated from
the same srpm must be EVR (Epoch-Version-Release) specific.
(i.e. freedink must have freedink-engine = %{version}-%{release})
OK, fixed.
I have a question: the 'freedink' package is built as 'i386' instead of
'noarch' (E: no-binary). I couldn't find a way to use a different BuildArch for
the 2 packages though.
* %fedora_version
- is not defined. Perhaps you want to use %{?fedora}.
Yes indeed. (I had copied this one from a .spec from another project, but it
was actually meant for the opensuse build service, with other variables)
* BuildRequires
- build.log shows:
124 checking for help2man...
125 no
126 configure: WARNING: You need to install help2man
Perhaps BuildRequires: help2man is needed.
I clarified this in Git, it's a developer tool. The build system takes care of
pregenerating man pages to avoid the 'help2man' dependency.
* Timestamps
- Please consider to use
make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL=install -p
to keep timestamps as much as possible. This method
usually works for Makefiles generated from recent
autotools
Did so.
* Desktop files
- must be treated by desktop-file-{install,validate}:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
Done too.
By the way I tried to play freedink but my mouse pointer does not
seem to be recognized.
Hmmm, is there anything special about your mouse? Is it under X11?
You mean you can't move the mouse in the intro screen, is that right?
I didn't have this problem yet, either it's a SDL bug, either it's the way I
continuously recenter the mouse to get relative motions without letting the
mouse get out of the window.
Here are the new files:
http://www.freedink.org/snapshots/fedora-review/freedink.spec
http://www.freedink.org/snapshots/fedora-review/freedink-1.08.20080920-1.fc8.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 463415] Review Request: hunspell-sq - Albanian hunspell dictionaries
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=463415 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- 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 463321] Review Request: hunspell-uz - Uzbek hunspell dictionaries
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=463321 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- 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 463570] New: Review Request: hunspell-ro - Romanian hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: hunspell-ro - Romanian hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463570 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-ro - Romanian hunspell dictionaries 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://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-ro.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-ro-3.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Romanian hunspell dictionaries -- 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 463571] New: Review Request: hunspell-oc - Occitan hunspell dictionary
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: hunspell-oc - Occitan hunspell dictionary https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463571 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-oc - Occitan hunspell dictionary 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://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-oc.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-oc-0.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Occitan hunspell dictionary -- 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 463123] Review Request: gnomint - Graphical x509 Certification Authority management 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=463123 Bug 463123 depends on bug 463501, which changed state. Bug 463501 Summary: gnutls-2.4.1-1.fc10.src.rpm fails test suite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463501 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- 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 463217] Review Request: gnuplot-py - Python interface to Gnuplot
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=463217
--- Comment #2 from James Ralston [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 18:04:15 EDT
---
(Note that for consistency with the rest of your spec file, my example in
comment 1 should have used %{__rm}, not rm.)
--
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 463217] Review Request: gnuplot-py - Python interface to Gnuplot
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=463217
James Ralston [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from James Ralston [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 18:02:17 EDT
---
Your spec file is missing at least:
BuildRequires: numpy
The way you've elected to remove the shebang from various files updates the
timestamps on those files. It is (arguably) better to use a method that
retains the original timestamps. E.g.:
for F in demo.py utils.py __init__.py test.py funcutils.py; do
%{__sed} -i.orig -e 1d ${F}
touch -r ${F}.orig ${F}
rm ${F}.orig
done
You should ask upstream to remove the shebangs from the files in question, and
note in the spec file that you have done so. See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
--
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 463587] New: Review Request: CWIRC - An X Chat plugin to allow send and receive morse code over IRC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: CWIRC - An X Chat plugin to allow send and receive morse code over IRC https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463587 Summary: Review Request: CWIRC - An X Chat plugin to allow send and receive morse code over IRC 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://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/cwirc.spec SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/cwirc-2.0.0-2.fc9.src.rpm Description: CWIRC is an X Chat plugin that allows the user to send and receive Morse Code (CW) over IRC. Active CWIRC on IRC channels include #CW on irc.freenode.net. Requires XChat 2.0 or higher to use. When installed a user button is added to X Chat to allow activation/deactivation of the plugin. This is my first submission for review sponsorship is needed. Sponsor Needed = Yes rpmlint= Pass RPM Build = Pass Mock Build = Pass -- 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 463587] Review Request: CWIRC - An X Chat plugin to allow send and receive morse code over IRC
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=463587 Randall Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Platform|All |i386 -- 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 463587] Review Request: CWIRC - An X Chat plugin to allow send and receive morse code over IRC
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=463587 Randall Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED], ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Version|rawhide |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 463123] Review Request: gnomint - Graphical x509 Certification Authority management 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=463123 --- Comment #2 from Adam Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 19:17:33 EDT --- I have addressed most of these comments (and thanks again for all this assistance). Two remaining points - having fixed the compiler flags, there is now an error during compilation. I've contacted the upstream developer about this. Secondly, on the Desktop file comment - the --remove-category option to desktop-file-install isn't listed when invoked with --help. Should I report that as a bug? Once I have resolved the compilation error I'll upload a new version. -- 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 463590] Review Request: thebridge - Echolink Ham Radio conference server
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=463590 Randall Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Platform|All |i386 Version|rawhide |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 463590] New: Review Request: thebridge - Echolink Ham Radio conference server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: thebridge - Echolink Ham Radio conference server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463590 Summary: Review Request: thebridge - Echolink Ham Radio conference server 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://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/thebridge-0.96-1.fc9.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/thebridge.spec Description: The Bridge is an Echolink conference server which allows multiple amateur radio operators to connect and converse using the Echolink system. **Operation requires a valid registration on the Echolink system. Sponsor Needed = Yes rpmlint= pass RPM Build = pass Mock Build = pass -- 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 463591] New: Review Request: tbdcnv - Sound file conversion utility for 'thebridge' conference server.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tbdcnv - Sound file conversion utility for 'thebridge' conference server. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463591 Summary: Review Request: tbdcnv - Sound file conversion utility for 'thebridge' conference server. 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://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/tbdcnv-0.03-1.fc9.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/tbdcnv.spec Description: tbdcnv is a complement to 'thebridge' which converts .wav files to .tbd files (the native sound file format for thebridge) or .tbd to .wav Sponsor Needed = Yes rpmlint= pass RPM Build = pass Mock Build = pass -- 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 463591] Review Request: tbdcnv - Sound file conversion utility for 'thebridge' conference server.
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=463591 Randall Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED], ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Platform|All |i386 Version|rawhide |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 446991] Review Request: python-coherence - Python framework to participate in digital living networks
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=446991 --- Comment #4 from Mauricio Teixeira [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 21:10:09 EDT --- The presented package is an update, based on the package already existent in Fedora 9. It happens that by the time I wrote this package, the one in Fedora was abandoned, missing updates for a long time, and I could not get in touch with the original packager. Also, this has been reviewed against latest packaging guidelines (well, by that time). This package probably needs an update, as the current version is already 0.5.8. Should I move forward? -- 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 463587] Review Request: CWIRC - An X Chat plugin to allow send and receive morse code over IRC
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=463587 manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Platform|i386|All Version|9 |rawhide --- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 22:22:53 EDT --- rpmlint is not silent: the src.rpm: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ rpmlint cwirc-2.0.0-2.fc9.src.rpm cwirc.src: W: non-standard-group Applications/Communication cwirc.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog cwirc.src: W: no-url-tag 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. the binary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock//epel-5-x86_64/result/cwirc-2.0.0-2.el5.x86_64.rpm cwirc.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/cwirc-2.0.0/LISEZMOI cwirc.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Applications/Communication cwirc.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog cwirc.x86_64: W: no-url-tag cwirc.x86_64: W: empty-%post cwirc.x86_64: W: empty-%postun 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Please also make sure that https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags is respected. The current spec always uses -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -DLINUX -fPIC -c On the plus side, it loads and seems to run on Centos 5/x86_64. -- 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 463123] Review Request: gnomint - Graphical x509 Certification Authority management 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=463123 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 23:00:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) having fixed the compiler flags, there is now an error during compilation. I've contacted the upstream developer about this. If you want to do a workaround for this, perhaps it is sufficient that you remove -Werror (however if you want to wait for upstream fix it is okay) Secondly, on the Desktop file comment - the --remove-category option to desktop-file-install isn't listed when invoked with --help. Should I report that as a bug? Perhaps --help-all will show the option (--help says: --help-all Show all help options) -- 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 458012] Review Request: openwsman - Opensource Implementation of WS-Management
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=458012 Matt Domsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added 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 458012] Review Request: openwsman - Opensource Implementation of WS-Management
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=458012 --- Comment #6 from Matt Domsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-24 00:57:35 EDT --- Updated to version 2.1.0 for security fixes, might as well start out with the most recent available from upstream. http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/openwsman/matt/ Because I basically rewrote the whole spec file from scratch (the one included in upstream needed a lot of work), Srinivas is going to do the formal review on this one, then take over as the package owner going forward. -- 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 463571] Review Request: hunspell-oc - Occitan hunspell dictionary
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=463571 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-24 01:33:22 EDT --- where can I see license mentioned GPLv3+ for this source occitan-languedocien-0.5-fx+tb+sm.xpi ? -- 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 426985] Review Request: php-suhosin - Suhosin extension for the php language
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=426985 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 442507] Review Request: libspe2 - SPE Runtime Management 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=442507 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added 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 458686] Review Request: bluez - Bluetooth libraries and utilities
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=458686 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 459885] Review Request: rubygem-highline - HighLine is a high-level command-line IO 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=459885 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] ||ail.com -- 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 459883] Review Request: rubygem-git - A package for using Git in Ruby code
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=459883 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] ||ail.com -- 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 463570] Review Request: hunspell-ro - Romanian hunspell dictionaries
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=463570 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-24 01:47:29 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=841275 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. ab70681d2e7a534e638d8c598593cd15 hunspell-ro.3.2.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. Suggestions:- You should include COPYING.MPL also then. 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
