[Bug 470792] Review Request: eclipse-shelled - Shell script editor plugin for Eclipse
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=470792
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 04:40:34
EDT ---
Updated with the comments
Spec URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-shelled.spec
SRPM URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-shelled-1.0.3-1.fc9.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #1)
I made a quick check. There is this issue that needs to be corrected before we
can do a full review:
* Source0 must be given in full URL from upstream's website.
Done: Fetch script added.
A few other things that I caught were:
* For the Group tag pick something from
/usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS
Development/Tools or Development/Languages maybe?
Done: Development/Tools
* %eclipse_base must be
%define eclipse_base %{_datadir}/eclipse
Check: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/EclipsePlugins
Otherwise the package will not build.
Not valid for Fedora 10.
* No %doc files? Check the source thoroughly. Please list every applicable
file
in %doc.
There is really no doc provided.
* Use CPL for the license
Done.
* There shouldn't be both spaces and tabs in the same SPEC file. Please use
one
or the other. rpmlint is a good application which will warn you about such
things and many other issues.
Fixed. Rpmlint do not show any warning.
--
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 472848] Review Request: jeuclid-core - MathML rendering solution
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=472848 --- Comment #2 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 05:14:04 EDT --- Some quick notes: % rpmlint jeuclid-core-* jeuclid-core.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/jeuclid-core-3.1.3/NOTICE jeuclid-core.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.1.3 ['3.1.3-1.fc9', '3.1.3-1'] You need to put the package release in a changelog entry, too. jeuclid-core.x86_64: E: no-binary jeuclid-core-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings. This should be a noarch package, because it contains no binaries (as rpmlint tells you). That'll also fix the empty debuginfo. Use BuildArch: noarch. BuildRequires: java-devel BuildRequires: java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel One of these is redundant. Please add comments to patches, i.e. # this patch fixes foo, Fedora specific Patch0: jeuclid-core-build.patch # this patch fixes bar, submitted upstream Patch1: jeuclid-core-FreeHep.patch I could sponsor you if you can demonstrate knowledge of our packaging guidelines, i.e. by submitting another package or two for review and doing a couple of package reviews. -- 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 472274] Review Request: atari++ - Unix based emulator of the Atari eight bit computers
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=472274 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 05:31:07 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: atari++ New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 464013] Review Request: findbugs-bcel - Byte Code Engineering Library with findbugs extensions
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=464013 Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #1 from Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 05:53:47 EDT --- Not officially reviewing this yet -- because I'm not sure about the issues of letting this package in in the first place -- but there are a couple of quickie rpmlint warnings that are probably easy to fix. findbugs-bcel.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java (should probably be Development/Libraries) findbugs-bcel-javadoc.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation (should probably be Documentation) -- 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 470354] Review Request: noip - A dynamic DNS update client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470354 --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 04:41:20 EDT --- Updated to 2.1.9. http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/noip.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/noip-2.1.9-1.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 459153] Review Request: ann - Library for searching Approximate Nearest Neighbors
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=459153 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:40:42 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: ann New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 366011] Review Request: ultimatestunts - 3D racing game
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=366011 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:41:59 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: ultimatestunts New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 472676] Review Request: partimage
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=472676 --- Comment #6 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:40:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) Is maintaining arch parity a requirement documented by upstream, or something you observed in testing? If it's not upstream, you'll want to include it in a partimage-README.txt Yes, Jon. According to my tests, the interface hangs when I use a 32 bit client (from system-rescuecd) connected to a 64 bit server. Since the normal usage is booting from a CD, so all partitions are unmounted (and making the image) the server, in general, will have to be 32 bits. Also, the server options have to match the client compilation options. Since the client from system-rescuecd use no login and no ssl, the server has to disable those options in /etc/sysconfi/partimaged. Note that partimage is developed by the team from System-rescuecd. -- 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 442280] Review Request: squirrel - high level imperative/OO programming 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=442280 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:42:51 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: squirrel New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 471863] Review Request: garmindev - Drivers for communication with Garmin GPS devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471863 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:41:23 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: garmindev New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 216322] Review Request: tailor - VCS repository conversion tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=216322 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:43:44 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: tailor New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 471662] Review Request: qlandkartegt - GPS device mapping 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=471662 Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Dan Horák [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 07:45:38 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: qlandkartegt New Branches: EL-5 Owners: sharkcz -- 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 460885] Review Request: netdude - a libpcap trace file manipulation 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=460885 Jon Ciesla [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 08:00:03 EDT --- 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 462580] Review Request: wstx - Woodstox Stax Implementation
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=462580
Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 08:03:17
EDT ---
This package didn't build in mock for me (fedora-9-i386); amid a lot of
warnings was the following error:
[javac] 98. ERROR in
/builddir/build/BUILD/wstx/src/java/com/ctc/wstx/evt/WAttribute.java (at line
97)
[javac] public String getDTDType() {
[javac] ^^
[javac] The return type is incompatible with Attribute.getDTDType()
If I build (locally) with OpenJDK instead of GCJ, it builds fine, so this seems
to be an incompatibility in the signature of that method. Not sure what the
solution is.
--
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 462580] Review Request: wstx - Woodstox Stax Implementation
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=462580 --- Comment #2 from Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 08:12:05 EDT --- While I'm at it, here are some rpmlint warnings on the OpenJDK-built packages: wstx.i386: W: no-documentation (probably not an issue, but should some of the files from the manual subpackage maybe be included as documentation in the main package?) wstx.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/wstx (should it be marked %config(noreplace) ?) wstx.i386: E: explicit-lib-dependency msv-xsdlib (false positive because of the package name matching *lib*) wstx.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java (should be Development/Libraries?) wstx-j2me.i386: W: no-documentation (no big issue) wstx-j2me.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java (== Development/Libraries ?) wstx-javadoc.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation (== Documentation ?) wstx-manual.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/wstx-3.1.1/CREDITS (run iconv on it during the build: inside %prep: iconv -f CREDITS tmp.utf8 mv tmp.utf8 CREDITS ) wstx-manual.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation (== Documentation ?) -- 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 462560] Review Request: xmlpull-api - XmlPull v1 API is a simple to use XML pull parsing API
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=462560 Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Mary Ellen Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 08:22:05 EDT --- Dunno about the version naming; your rationale sounds plausible to me but I could also see it going the other way. A few rpmlint issues: xmlpull-api.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Java (== Development/Libraries ?) xmlpull-api.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1.4b-2 ['0:1.1.4b-2.fc9', '0:1.1.4b-2'] This goes away if you remove the Epoch: 0 from the spec file. Is the epoch actually necessary? If so, the changelog entry should be 0:1.1.4b-2 xmlpull-api-javadoc.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation (== Documentation ?) -- 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 469968] Review Request: Vala - a programming 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=469968 Paul F. Johnson [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 472676] Review Request: partimage
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=472676 Jon Ciesla [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 08:44:05 EDT --- Ok. Also, probably best to use NoArch instead of BuildArch, so sparc, alpha, etc can take a crack at it later. rpmlint on SRPM: partimage.src: W: strange-permission create_certificates.sh 0775 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. partimage.src: W: strange-permission partimaged-passwd 0755 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. Should these not be 700, or at least 744? rpmlint on RPMS: partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /home/images partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /home/images partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf partimag OK. partimage-server.i386: E: dir-or-file-in-home /home/images What's going on here? This cannot be in /home, maybe /usr/share/partimage-server or /var/lib/partimage-server. partimage-server.i386: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/partimaged partimage-server.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name partimaged Probably fine, but could be patched to be partimage-server, or possibly the sub-package renamed partimaged. partimage-server.i386: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh Should be in /usr/share/partimaged/ partimage-server.i386: E: non-readable /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers 0600 Probably fine. Full review in progress. . . -- 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 226493] Merge Review: tix
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=226493 Vitezslav Crhonek [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Vitezslav Crhonek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 09:10:02 EDT --- I don't think that doing Merge Review to package owned by myself is good idea. Changing to NEW, adding myself to CC list. Hope that somebody will take it and go through Merge Review process. -- 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 472676] Review Request: partimage
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=472676 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 09:32:58 EDT --- License is GPLv2+. Fix Source0 URL. . . https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL Send gcc-4.3 patch upstream if not already done, document that you did and how in the spec. The DOCS are duplicated in the main and server packages. Usually redundant, but since they don't require each other, it's OK here. Need to BuildRequires zlib-devel. -- 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 469955] Review Request: fprintd - D-Bus service for Fingerprint reader access
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=469955
Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:15:53
EDT ---
Here is what rpmlint says on the rpms:
fprintd.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/fprintd.conf
You said you wanted to make this conf ?
fprintd.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/dbus-1/system.d/net.reactivated.Fprint.conf
This is ignorable
fprintd-devel.i386: W: summary-not-capitalized fprintd development
documentation
I always use a more-or-less standardized summary of Development files for
%{name} for -devel packages.
fprintd-devel.i386: W: invalid-license GFDLv1.1+
No + there, I think.
printd-pam.i386: W: no-documentation
Thats sad, but ignorable.
--
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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |oject.org) | --- Comment #23 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:16:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) This depends on how this perl script is related to the rest part of nxtvepg. If this perl script uses (i.e. depends on) the rest part of nxtvepg, then the license conflict cannot be resolved only by moving it into a subpackage and this script must be removed completely. Are you sure? After reading http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ I even think it would be enough to add GPLv3+ to the License tag: cite Q: How should I handle multiple licensing situations? A: It depends on the situation. Here are some common cases: # A package has multiple binaries, some of them are GPLv2, some are GPLv3, and some are MIT licensed. In this case, you do need to list all of the individual licenses of the compiled binaries in the License tag, so it should read: License: GPLv2 and GPLv3 and MIT /cite If this is possible for binaries, it should also be possible for scripts, shouldn't it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468539] Review Request: sugar-jukebox - Media player activity for Sugar
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=468539 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #16 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:23:01 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 469955] Review Request: fprintd - D-Bus service for Fingerprint reader access
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=469955
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:29:47
EDT ---
Taking a first look at the spec file:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}
Not sure if theres a policy about this, but I always do
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
to avoid surprises
Going to do a formal review in a bit.
--
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 456138] Review Request: edb - Debugger based on the ptrace API and QT4
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=456138 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:31:16 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 472685] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Component-InstancePerContext - Return a new instance a component on each request
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=472685 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:32:00 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 454410] Review Request: mingw32-gcc - MinGW Windows cross-compiler (GCC) for C and 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=454410 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:34:36 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 454412] Review Request: mingw32-runtime - MinGW Windows cross-compiler runtime and root filesystem
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=454412 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:35:35 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 469955] Review Request: fprintd - D-Bus service for Fingerprint reader access
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=469955
--- Comment #6 from Bastien Nocera [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:36:42 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #4)
Here is what rpmlint says on the rpms:
fprintd.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/fprintd.conf
You said you wanted to make this conf ?
No, I added a comment about it:
# This file should be marked as config when it does something useful
fprintd.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/dbus-1/system.d/net.reactivated.Fprint.conf
This is ignorable
fprintd-devel.i386: W: summary-not-capitalized fprintd development
documentation
I always use a more-or-less standardized summary of Development files for
%{name} for -devel packages.
OK, will change.
fprintd-devel.i386: W: invalid-license GFDLv1.1+
No + there, I think.
But the docs say:
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under
the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or any later
version [...]
printd-pam.i386: W: no-documentation
Thats sad, but ignorable.
I'll write a little something to go upstream and in the package.
(In reply to comment #5)
Taking a first look at the spec file:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}
Not sure if theres a policy about this, but I always do
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
to avoid surprises
Yes, will fix.
--
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 459088] Review Request: protobuf - Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format
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=459088 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #39 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:39:03 EDT --- CVS Done, no need to put an owner in the initialCC list -- 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 472664] Review Request: perl-HTML-TokeParser-Simple - Easy to use HTML::TokeParser interface
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=472664 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:44:22 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 472666] Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-Natural - Create machine readable date/time with natural parsing logic
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=472666 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:46:10 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 454414] Review Request: mingw32-w32api - MinGW Windows cross-compiler Win32 header 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=454414 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:37:47 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 472348] Review Request: hunspell-no - Norwegian hunspell dictionaaries
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=472348 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:43:42 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 472170] Review Request: perl-Check-ISA - DWIM, correct checking of an object's class
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=472170 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:42:09 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:42:05 EDT --- This is the case in which GPLv2 part of the codes does not depend on GPLv3 part (i.e. GPLv2 part binaries can be rebuilt even if the codes licensed under GPLv3 are completely removed from the tarball and GPLv2 binaries does not use GPLv3 binaries in essence). So the question is how this perl script is tied to nxtvepg binary. - If this perl script can be used without nxtvepg binary (i.e. with this binary removed), then multiple licensing situation can be applied. - If this perl script essencially uses nxtvepg binary, then license needs fixing. -- 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 472165] Review Request: perl-Test-Strict - Check syntax, presence of use strict/warnings, and test coverage
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=472165 Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs- |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:47:46 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Test-Strict Short Description: Check syntax, presence of use strict/warnings, and test coverage Owners: cweyl Branches: F-8 F-9 F-10 devel InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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 472668] Review Request: perl-Captcha-reCAPTCHA - Perl implementation of the reCAPTCHA API
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=472668 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:48:03 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 471863] Review Request: garmindev - Drivers for communication with Garmin GPS devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471863 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:50:49 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 472165] Review Request: perl-Test-Strict - Check syntax, presence of use strict/warnings, and test coverage
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=472165 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs- --- Comment #7 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:40:52 EDT --- please make a new CVS request with the correct summary. -- 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 366011] Review Request: ultimatestunts - 3D racing game
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=366011 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:51:55 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 216322] Review Request: tailor - VCS repository conversion tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=216322 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #20 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:53:30 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 472274] Review Request: atari++ - Unix based emulator of the Atari eight bit computers
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=472274 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:54:12 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 242228] Review Request: ps2eps - PS-to-EPS converter
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=242228 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:56:14 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 471662] Review Request: qlandkartegt - GPS device mapping 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=471662 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:54:46 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 442280] Review Request: squirrel - high level imperative/OO programming 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=442280 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:52:35 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 472165] Review Request: perl-Test-Strict - Check syntax, presence of use strict/warnings, and test coverage
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=472165 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:59:07 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 459153] Review Request: ann - Library for searching Approximate Nearest Neighbors
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=459153 Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Dennis Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:56:51 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 468539] Review Request: sugar-jukebox - Media player activity for Sugar
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=468539 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 13:08:07 EDT --- sugar-jukebox-5-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-jukebox-5-3.fc10 -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #25 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:00:21 EDT --- We have following situation: [1] Nxtvepg (GPLv2) does not need the Perl script (GPLv3+). It can use the script if it is there but also runs fine without it. Both communicate with each other and exchange data. But there is no hard link between both. Nxtvepg simply pipes preprocessed data from /dev/vbi to the script, the script parses the data and gives XML as output, which in turn nxtvepg reads via pipe. My opinion is that if this is not legal then no GPLv2 UNIX tool could interact with a GPLv3+ one. Upstream also does not seem to see a problem here. [2] The Perl script (GPLv3+) can also run without nxtvepg. But it needs preprocessed input data to do something useful. This data has to come from a file or standard input. Optionally it can use the VBI device directly -- if the Perl module Video-ZVBI (GPLv2+) is available. This module is not packaged for Fedora yet. But this could be done... Because of [1] the script is included in the nxtvepg tarball. Because of [2] it is also available in its own tarball under http://nxtvepg.sourceforge.net/tv_grab_ttx I think it is enough to set License to GPLv2 and GPLv3+ and keep the script in the nxtvepg package. But I admit that my knowledge about licensing is pretty low. There is also the way to introduce two new packages (no subpackages, one for the script and one for the Video-ZVBI Perl module) and remove the script from the nxtvepg package. Of course this also means two more package reviews to work on ;-) -- 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 472676] Review Request: partimage
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=472676 --- Comment #9 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:05:37 EDT --- rpmlint on SRPM: partimage.src: W: strange-permission create_certificates.sh 0775 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. I put the script that creates the certificates in the same directory the certificates are going to be. It has been moved to /usr/share/partimaged. partimage.src: W: strange-permission partimaged-passwd 0755 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. The idea behind this script is that users do not need to have a local account on the server in case a login is needed. It has been moved to /usr/share/partimaged. This script creates a db file (user, passwd), which can be used by pam for authentication purposes. The problem is that pam is ignoring this file and using only the /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers, which lists only local users (no passwords). Therefore, my pam rules are not working the way I wanted, but I do not know how to fix them ... For now, only local users can authenticate. Any suggestion? Do you know how pam works? Should these not be 700, or at least 744? rpmlint on RPMS: partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /home/images partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /home/images partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf partimag OK. partimage-server.i386: E: dir-or-file-in-home /home/images What's going on here? This cannot be in /home, maybe /usr/share/partimage-server or /var/lib/partimage-server. I used a %bcond_without home because it is where I save my images (all my free space is always in /home). This has been changed to %bcond_with home which makes the spec to put the images in /var/partimaged. partimage-server.i386: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/partimaged partimage-server.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name partimaged Probably fine, but could be patched to be partimage-server, or possibly the sub-package renamed partimaged. The process name is partimaged. I think is counter-intuitive to use partimage-server. The sub-package could be renamed, but everybody else uses partimage-server. Only Fedora would be different ... partimage-server.i386: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh Should be in /usr/share/partimaged/ Already moved. partimage-server.i386: E: non-readable /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers 0600 Probably fine. License is GPLv2+. Fixed. Fix Source0 URL. . . https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL Changed. Send gcc-4.3 patch upstream if not already done, document that you did and how in the spec. It is in the changelog section. The patch is very simple, and just changed some include files for C++: -#include iostream.h +#include iostream The DOCS are duplicated in the main and server packages. Usually redundant, but since they don't require each other, it's OK here. Need to BuildRequires zlib-devel. Done. Links updated. A README.fedora will be added. -- 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 472170] Review Request: perl-Check-ISA - DWIM, correct checking of an object's class
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=472170 Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472165] Review Request: perl-Test-Strict - Check syntax, presence of use strict/warnings, and test coverage
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=472165 Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456138] Review Request: edb - Debugger based on the ptrace API and QT4
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=456138 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:33:01 EDT --- edb-0.9.6-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/edb-0.9.6-2.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 472676] Review Request: partimage
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=472676 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:33:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) rpmlint on SRPM: partimage.src: W: strange-permission create_certificates.sh 0775 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. I put the script that creates the certificates in the same directory the certificates are going to be. It has been moved to /usr/share/partimaged. partimage.src: W: strange-permission partimaged-passwd 0755 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. The idea behind this script is that users do not need to have a local account on the server in case a login is needed. It has been moved to /usr/share/partimaged. Good. This script creates a db file (user, passwd), which can be used by pam for authentication purposes. The problem is that pam is ignoring this file and using only the /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers, which lists only local users (no passwords). Therefore, my pam rules are not working the way I wanted, but I do not know how to fix them ... For now, only local users can authenticate. Any suggestion? Do you know how pam works? Not sure. Is this something you're adding on, or functionality of the original code? Should these not be 700, or at least 744? rpmlint on RPMS: partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /home/images partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /home/images partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/partimaged partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf partimag partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf partimag OK. partimage-server.i386: E: dir-or-file-in-home /home/images What's going on here? This cannot be in /home, maybe /usr/share/partimage-server or /var/lib/partimage-server. I used a %bcond_without home because it is where I save my images (all my free space is always in /home). This has been changed to %bcond_with home which makes the spec to put the images in /var/partimaged. Good. partimage-server.i386: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/partimaged partimage-server.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name partimaged Probably fine, but could be patched to be partimage-server, or possibly the sub-package renamed partimaged. The process name is partimaged. I think is counter-intuitive to use partimage-server. The sub-package could be renamed, but everybody else uses partimage-server. Only Fedora would be different ... Then we can leave it -server. partimage-server.i386: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh Should be in /usr/share/partimaged/ Already moved. partimage-server.i386: E: non-readable /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers 0600 Probably fine. License is GPLv2+. Fixed. Fix Source0 URL. . . https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL Changed. Send gcc-4.3 patch upstream if not already done, document that you did and how in the spec. It is in the changelog section. The patch is very simple, and just changed some include files for C++: -#include iostream.h +#include iostream Should be commented next to patch in spec. Changelog is good to have as well. The DOCS are duplicated in the main and server packages. Usually redundant, but since they don't require each other, it's OK here. Need to BuildRequires zlib-devel. Done. Links updated. A README.fedora will be added. Probably best to update the release and repost new links, as an additional indicator of exactly when the above has been completed. -- 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 456138] Review Request: edb - Debugger based on the ptrace API and QT4
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=456138 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:34:09 EDT --- edb-0.9.6-2.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/edb-0.9.6-2.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 456138] Review Request: edb - Debugger based on the ptrace API and QT4
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=456138 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:35:19 EDT --- edb-0.9.6-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/edb-0.9.6-2.fc10 -- 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 472348] Review Request: hunspell-no - Norwegian hunspell dictionaaries
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=472348 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #5 from Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 17:56:08 EDT --- Built into rawhide (i.e. F11) -- 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 472992] New: Review Request: hunspell-gu - Manx 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-gu - Manx hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472992 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-gu - Manx 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-gv.spec SRPM URL: srpm info here Description: description here -- 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 472994] New: Review Request: hunspell-gv - Manx 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-gv - Manx hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472994 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-gv - Manx 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-gv.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-gv-0.20040505-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Manx 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 472997] New: Review Request: hunspell-ny - Chichewa 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-ny - Chichewa hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472997 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-ny - Chichewa 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-ny.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-ny-0.20050108-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Chichewa 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 472995] New: Review Request: hunspell-hil - Hiligaynon 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-hil - Hiligaynon hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472995 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-hil - Hiligaynon 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-hil.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-hil-0.20050406-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Hiligaynon 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 472996] New: Review Request: hunspell-ia - Interlingua 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-ia - Interlingua hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472996 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-ia - Interlingua 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-ia.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/hunspell/hunspell-ia-0.20050226-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Interlingua 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 472848] Review Request: jeuclid-core - MathML rendering solution
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=472848 --- Comment #3 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 18:46:46 EDT --- Thank you, I did not realize that I needed to run rpmlint on the rpm as well, I had run it on the SRPM and the spec. The changes are now made, and it compiles cleanly in koji. See: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=951853 I have another ReviewRequest going here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472724 that was off the wishlist. And I will start reviewing a few packages. -- 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 472724] Review Request: xjparse - wrapper for the Xerces XML Schema validator
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=472724 --- Comment #2 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 18:53:56 EDT --- Just updated the spec and SRPM for a couple of build issues. There are now no rpmlint errors except for one that is complaining about missing doc. There are no licence or readme files included in the src zip what do I do? -- 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 448717] Review Request: gnome-rdp - rdesktop front end
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=448717 --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 19:12:36 EDT --- gnome-rdp-0.2.3-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-rdp-0.2.3-2.fc10 -- 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 468116] Review Request: sugar-analyze - Analysing tool for Sugar
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=468116 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 20:01:56 EDT --- sugar-analyze-8-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-analyze-8-2.fc10 -- 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 472842] Review Request: pytagger - ID3 Tag Reader and Writer Library for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472842 Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #1 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 20:45:27 EDT --- Note, I am unsponsored so I cannot approve this MUSTS: *rpmlint -- passes cleanly in mock on rpm srpm and spec 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. *Package name correct *Spec name correct *Licensed fedora safe and correct *Licence files is not in its own file so %doc is ok without it *spec in english *spec is readable *md5sum is same as source file 0af47e825f510204d839cb190743ad40 *builds in mock *builds in mock so buildrequires are good *locales N/A *library files N/A *not designed to be relocatable *owns created dirs *permissions set *no large docs *%docs not runtime *no devel needed *no static libs *no .pc files *no .la files *not gui app *does not take ownership of other packages files *buildroot cleaned at start of %install *all file names valid UTF-8 SHOULDS: I did not see the licence as a separate file has upstream been notified? Any spec descriptions available? Builds fine in mock. Builds for all arch (noarch) I have not done a functionality test. No scriptlets. No subpackages. This package looks good to me, may want to look into the two questions I put in the SHOULDS section. -- 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 470792] Review Request: eclipse-shelled - Shell script editor plugin for Eclipse
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=470792
--- Comment #3 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25
21:11:51 EDT ---
* Whenever you are uploading a new release, don't forget the bump the release
number. This applies even during the review process.
* rpmlint says
eclipse-shelled.noarch: W: no-documentation
eclipse-shelled.src: W: strange-permission fetch-shelled.sh 0764
** At least these files need to go to %doc.
./com.something.eclipse.shelled-feature/license.html
./com.something.eclipse.shelled-feature/cpl-v10.html
./com.something.eclipse.shelled.resources/about.html
(Check the sample spec file at the eclipse guidelines)
The other about.html files have the same content.
Other than this, what are all those manpages for?
** Afaik, we use 644 for source files.
* You do not need
BuildRequires:zip
BuildRequires:lzma
* We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-)
* Use the %{version} macro whenever applicable (e.g. source0).
--
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 472842] Review Request: pytagger - ID3 Tag Reader and Writer Library for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472842 --- Comment #2 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 21:36:20 EDT --- Hi. Thanks for your time. I hope you get sponsored soon. - Actually, the license file is there. It is the COPYING file. The name COPYING is a common name for license files. - Spec descriptions... I think I strictly followed the python guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python Do you think there is something that is not clear? -- 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 472994] Review Request: hunspell-gv - Manx 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=472994 --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 21:42:30 EDT --- *** Bug 472992 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472992] Review Request: hunspell-gu - Manx 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=472992 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 21:42:30 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 472994 *** -- 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 461454] Review Request: lordsawar - Turn-based strategy game in a fantasy setting
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=461454 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 21:57:43 EDT --- lordsawar-0.1.3-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lordsawar-0.1.3-3.fc10 -- 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 472842] Review Request: pytagger - ID3 Tag Reader and Writer Library for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472842 --- Comment #3 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 22:09:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Hi. Thanks for your time. I hope you get sponsored soon. - Actually, the license file is there. It is the COPYING file. The name COPYING is a common name for license files. I remember reading that file, not sure why I said that. - Spec descriptions... I think I strictly followed the python guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python Do you think there is something that is not clear? I was referring to this part of the review guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. But as it says if available, so by no means is that a blocking issue. -- 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 471829] Review Request: log4cxx - Log4cxx - a port to C++ of the Log4j project
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=471829 Hayden James [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 462163] Review Request: checkdns - A Domain Name Server analysis and reporting 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=462163
--- Comment #9 from John Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 23:25:25 EDT
---
I apologize for the late reply. Life stepped in and I wasn't able to look at
this when you started looking at it. I am going to submit a new version to
correct the blockers. One quick question though. When I was going through all
of the Fedora packaging guidelines, I don't recall seeing anything about the
%{optflags} variable. Could you refer me to the page that discusses this
variable, so I can make certain that I use it correctly?
Thank you very much.
--
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 470792] Review Request: eclipse-shelled - Shell script editor plugin for Eclipse
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=470792 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [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 472995] Review Request: hunspell-hil - Hiligaynon 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=472995 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] 2008-11-25 23:49:02 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=952087 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. 6ce553007a773a1c2ffd68b660ddb60b aspell5-hil-0.11-0.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc 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 472997] Review Request: hunspell-ny - Chichewa 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=472997 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] 2008-11-25 23:48:34 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=952089 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. ce2d9a52eb814bc4d4107cf8d05f32f3 ny_MW.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 472996] Review Request: hunspell-ia - Interlingua 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=472996 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] 2008-11-25 23:48:49 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=952091 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. 1b3705c8ca3de449fe28e109ee86adf4 ia_myspell.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 472994] Review Request: hunspell-gv - Manx 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=472994 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 23:53:32 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=952132 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. 139b5aa1f5ea85fb7a4be0338039e959 aspell-gv-0.50-0.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc 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 462163] Review Request: checkdns - A Domain Name Server analysis and reporting 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=462163 --- Comment #10 from John Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 00:06:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) - I did not examine carefully the program, but I think that you can eliminate the need of suid group for the checkdns folder if - in %post - you create a checkdns user and use chown checkdns.apache /var/www/html/checkdns chmod 755 /var/www/html/checkdns make sure that the checkdns program is run as the checkdns user (which is extremely easy to do in cron) The only drawback is that if the program is run by another user (in a console), the HTML files will not be created with the correct ownership. But as the output is sent to the console, it can be redirected anywhere. I'm a little confused. Why would I want to do all of that in %post? Why not in %pre, and just set the ownership and permissions in the %files section? Unless I'm mistaken, what you are proposing would require changing perms/ownership after they have been placed into the RPM database, with the result that rpm -V will always flag them as having been changed. Am I missing something? (In addition, every other package that I have seen add users or groups has done so in %pre.) -- 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 472027] Review Request: onboard - Simple on-screen Keyboard
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=472027 --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 00:06:35 EDT --- ping -- 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 472079] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Copy - Copy Regexp objects
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=472079 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:09:45 EDT --- perl-Regexp-Copy-0.06-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 472085] Review Request: perl-HTML-Tiny - Lightweight, dependency free HTML/XML generation
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=472085 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:10:15 EDT --- perl-HTML-Tiny-1.03-1.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 472085] Review Request: perl-HTML-Tiny - Lightweight, dependency free HTML/XML generation
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=472085 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:10:39 EDT --- perl-HTML-Tiny-1.03-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 468299] Review Request: jabberpy - Python xmlstream and jabber IM protocol libs
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=468299 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:10:31 EDT --- jabberpy-0.5-0.17.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 472079] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Copy - Copy Regexp objects
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=472079 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472085] Review Request: perl-HTML-Tiny - Lightweight, dependency free HTML/XML generation
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=472085 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472072] Review Request: perl-Sub-Override - Perl extension for easily overriding subroutines
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=472072 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:15:34 EDT --- perl-Sub-Override-0.08-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 472072] Review Request: perl-Sub-Override - Perl extension for easily overriding subroutines
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=472072 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 447104] Review Request: qdevelop - development environment for QT4
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=447104 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:11:44 EDT --- qdevelop-0.26.1-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update qdevelop'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/f10/FEDORA-2008-10236 -- 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 464049] Package Review Request for libprojectM-qt
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=464049 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:12:10 EDT --- libprojectM-qt-1.2.0-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 472096] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Assemble - Assemble multiple Regular Expressions into a single RE
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=472096 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:14:25 EDT --- perl-Regexp-Assemble-0.34-1.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 472096] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Assemble - Assemble multiple Regular Expressions into a single RE
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=472096 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456138] Review Request: edb - Debugger based on the ptrace API and QT4
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=456138 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:15:42 EDT --- edb-0.9.6-2.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing-newkey update edb'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-10266 -- 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 472083] Review Request: perl-boolean - Boolean support for Perl
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=472083 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:18:01 EDT --- perl-boolean-0.20-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 446563] Review Request: rubygem-rspec - Behaviour Driven Development framework for Ruby.
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=446563 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:20:58 EDT --- rubygem-rspec-1.1.11-1.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 429882] Review Request: python-Levenshtein - Levenshtein distance measurement library in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429882 Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472096] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Assemble - Assemble multiple Regular Expressions into a single RE
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=472096 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-26 01:17:47 EDT --- perl-Regexp-Assemble-0.34-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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
