[Bug 473754] Review Request: nopaste - Command-line interface to rafb.net/paste
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 Philipp Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: main |Review Request: nopaste - |package name here - short |Command-line interface to |summary here |rafb.net/paste -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473754] Review Request: nopaste - Command-line interface to rafb.net/paste
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] ||g 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 473754] New: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here 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://thinkcoding.org/Fedora/nopaste.spec SRPM URL: http://thinkcoding.org/Fedora/nopaste-2835-1.fc10.src.rpm This is a simple script to facilitate sharing text through http://rafb.net/paste/. Like most UNIX utilities, it can take stdin or files on the command-line. Additionally nopaste can use the X cut buffer for input, designed to be used with a window-manager key binding or panel launcher. The resulting URLs are printed to stdout and additionally placed in the X cut buffer for quick pasting. I still need a Sponsor -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473754] Review Request: nopaste - Command-line interface to rafb.net/paste
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 --- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 04:44:33 EDT --- first package review of phil is: Bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469585 moon-buggy the package is assigned to nobody. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469585] Review Request: moon-buggy - Drive and jump with some car accros the moon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469585 Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #9 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 04:43:28 EDT --- secound package review of phil is: Bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 nopaste -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469585] Review Request: moon-buggy - Drive and jump with some car accros the moon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469585 Simon Wesp [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 472542] Review Request: afuse - An automounter implemented with FUSE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472542
Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 05:11:40 EDT
---
REVIEW:
MUST Items:
+ rpmlint is silent
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines .
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines .
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] SOURCES]$ md5sum afuse-0.2.tar.gz*
97b58a768ecb30696fb6c33dd8435b83 afuse-0.2.tar.gz
97b58a768ecb30696fb6c33dd8435b83 afuse-0.2.tar.gz.from_srpm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] SOURCES]$
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture (ppc).
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires
+ The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} ( or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
+ The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section of
Packaging Guidelines .
+ The package contains code, or permissable content.
+ Everything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} ( or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
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 438452] Review Request: java-gnome: Java GNOME bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438452 Martin Garton [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #12 from Martin Garton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 06:15:42 EDT --- What is still remaining to do before this can move forward? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473764] New: Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473764 Summary: Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture tool 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://www.desi4club.com/rpms/xvidcap.spec SRPM URL: http://www.desi4club.com/rpms/xvidcap-1.1.7-11.fc10.src.rpm Description: xvidcap is a screen capture tool for creating videos off an X-Window desktop for illustration or documentation purposes. It is intended to be a standard-based alternative for commercial tools, such as Lotus ScreenCam or Camtasia Studio. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473765] Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture 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=473765 Kashif Ahmad Khan [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Platform|All |i386 Version|rawhide |10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473765] New: Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473765 Summary: Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture tool 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://www.desi4club.com/rpms/xvidcap.spec SRPM URL: http://www.desi4club.com/rpms/xvidcap-1.1.7-11.fc10.src.rpm Description: xvidcap is a screen capture tool for creating videos off an X-Window desktop for illustration or documentation purposes. It is intended to be a standard-based alternative for commercial tools, such as Lotus ScreenCam or Camtasia Studio. Review Description: This is my first package and i need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473765] Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture 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=473765 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 07:45:11 EDT --- *** Bug 473764 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 473764] Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture 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=473764 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 07:45:11 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 473765 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473765] Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture 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=473765 --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 07:51:51 EDT --- mplayer cannot be on Fedora (currently on rpmfusion), so this package cannot be approved unless the dependency for mplayer can be removed. If this cannot be done, please consider to move to rpmfusion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473765] Review Request: xvidcap - An X-Windows screen capture 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=473765 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Platform|i386|All Version|10 |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 473754] Review Request: nopaste - Command-line interface to rafb.net/paste
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 --- Comment #2 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 08:01:48 EDT --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ yum deplist rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/nopaste-2835-1.fc10.noarch.rpm Suche Abhängigkeiten: Paket: nopaste.noarch 2835-1.fc10 Abhängigkeit: /usr/bin/ruby provider: ruby.i386 1.8.6.287-2.fc10 rpm will requires ruby by reading of from nopaste script. this is okay, the further requires will be shipped with ruby itself. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpmdev-rpmlintsetuptree 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. nopaste.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. no documentation, okay, you haven't one. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=964022 This is frightfully boring. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473046] Review Request: miniupnpc - command line tool to control NAT in UPnP-enabled routers as Linksys, D-Link etc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473046
--- Comment #12 from Avi Alkalay [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 08:10:59 EDT
---
Suggestions incorporated. Please recheck
http://avi.alkalay.net/software/miniupnpc/
Some notes:
- The LICENCE file is still being renamed due to wrong spelling.
- Package now includes an initscript and a sysconfig conf file.
- To avoid a patch and to make it install correctly on x86_64, I included the
following on %install:
%ifarch x86_64
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}
%endif
Can't test this. I don't have a x86_64 build system.
rpmlint still outputs the following which I need some guidance on how to solve:
miniupnpc.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/libminiupnpc.so.3
miniupnpc.i386: E: shlib-with-non-pic-code /usr/lib/libminiupnpc.so.3
miniupnpc.i386: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/sysconfig/upnpnats
miniupnpc.i386: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/upnpnats
miniupnpc.i386: E: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/upnpnats upnpcnats
miniupnpc.i386: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/upnpnats
miniupnpc.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name upnpnats
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473412] Review Request: kopete-cryptography - Encrypts and signs messages in Kopete using the OpenPGP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473412
--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Reznik [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 08:35:35
EDT ---
[NEEDSWORK] rpmlint output:
According to other KDE packages reviews it's safe to ignore rpmlint warnings.
[NEEDSWORK] Owns all created directories:
Ok, I'm quite desoriented in this area of owning directories, I have to study
more :)
[NEEDSWORK] Consistent macro usage
Ok, I'll repair template to use macros consistently
{NEEDSWORK} follows special guidelines
Ok, I'll take a look
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467644] Review Request: sugar-memorize - Memorize 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=467644 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 08:44:18 EDT --- sugar-memorize-29-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-memorize-29-1.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 458054] Review Request: arm4 - Application Response Measurement (ARM) agent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458054 --- Comment #19 from David Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 08:42:15 EDT --- Good point Stefan. Truth is, I hadn't realized they were in there until review. Now that life's little annoyances are out of the way, I should be able to get an update in the next couple of days. BTW Jon, Stefan is one of the stakeholders in that extra license file :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473775] Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||463266 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463266] Review Request: globalplatform - Access OpenPlatform and GlobalPlatform smart cards library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463266 François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||473775 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473775] New: Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 Summary: Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card 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://users.tuxed.net/fkooman/rpmbuild/SPECS/gpshell.spec SRPM URL: http://users.tuxed.net/fkooman/rpmbuild/SRPMS/gpshell-1.4.2-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card. It is written on top of the GlobalPlatform library, which was developed by Karsten Ohme. It uses smart card communication protocols ISO-7816-4 and OpenPlatform 2.0.1 and GlobalPlatform 2.1.1. It can establish a secure channel with a smart card, load, instantiate, delete, list applets on a smart card. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473775] Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 --- Comment #1 from François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 09:19:59 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=325126) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=325126) SUN license for included HelloWorld.cap file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473775] Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 --- Comment #2 from François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 09:26:07 EDT --- There is problem with this package with regard to the included HelloWorld.cap file from Sun's JavaCard SDK. The attachment shows the license text you need to agree to when downloading the SDK (http://java.sun.com/javacard/devkit/). I guess this needs to be removed (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code) but I wanted to have some feedback on this before doing this... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463266] Review Request: globalplatform - Access OpenPlatform and GlobalPlatform smart cards library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463266 François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |) | --- Comment #15 from François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 09:28:30 EDT --- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 Review request for GPshell (which depends on globalplatform). My apologies for the delay... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473046] Review Request: miniupnpc - command line tool to control NAT in UPnP-enabled routers as Linksys, D-Link etc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473046
--- Comment #13 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 09:39:23
EDT ---
UNless you want to be sure the Americans are very very happy, you can remove
the mv. licence is valid English (British English).See
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/LICENCE
Your pseudo fix for the %{_libdir} problem does not work and you still need to
address the problem of Fedora's mandatory compilation flags. Quoting from the
end of the build log:
testigddescparse.c:51: warning: ignoring return value of 'fread', declared with
attribute warn_unused_result
gcc minixmlvalid.o minixml.o -o minixmlvalid
gcc testminixml.o minixml.o igd_desc_parse.o -o testminixml
gcc testupnpreplyparse.o minixml.o upnpreplyparse.o -o testupnpreplyparse
gcc testigddescparse.o igd_desc_parse.o minixml.o -o testigddescparse
minixml validation test
./minixmlvalid
14 events
touch validateminixml
ar crs libminiupnpc.a miniwget.o minixml.o igd_desc_parse.o minisoap.o
miniupnpc.o upnpreplyparse.o upnpcommands.o minissdpc.o upnperrors.o
gcc -shared -Wl,-soname,libminiupnpc.so.3 -o libminiupnpc.so miniwget.o
minixml.o igd_desc_parse.o minisoap.o miniupnpc.o
upnpreplyparse.o upnpcommands.o minissdpc.o upnperrors.o
gcc -o upnpc-static upnpc.o libminiupnpc.a
/usr/bin/ld: miniwget.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a local symbol' can
not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
miniwget.o: could not read symbols: Bad value
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [libminiupnpc.so] Error 1
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.jzb5MU (%build)
From the above you can see that gcc is called without any flags and that
linking fails.
I'll look at the other problems after you solve these two.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 - 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 #21 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2008-11-30 09:48:15 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
This build contains more fixes, as well as including the jeuclid-fod and
jeuclid-mathviewer subpackages. I cannot build the jeuclid-cli until
commons-cli is updated bug 473373 . I have had to write a new build script
based on the Debian one as the ones included do not work well with fedora
package build structure. I still need to do the GUI stuff for
jeclid-mathviewer.
SRPM: http://bashton.fedorapeople.org/jeuclid-3.1.3-7.fc9.src.rpm
SPEC: http://bashton.fedorapeople.org/jeuclid.spec
This specfile is older than the one in the src.rpm.
Requires: fop = 0.95
Does it work only with this version? Will it have to be rebuilt when fop is
upgraded to a newer version?
(cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_javadir} for jar in *-%{version}*; do ln -sf ${jar}
`echo $jar| sed s|-%{version}||g`; done)
This could be rewritten as:
pushd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_javadir}
for jar in *-%{version}*; do
ln -sf ${jar} `echo $jar| sed s|-%{version}||g`
done
popd
Which is more readable IMHO, but I'm not insisting on it. Also, the usage of
'|' in sed expression is a bit unusual. I suggest plain slash ('/') instead.
It looks very nice otherwise.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473716] Review Request: perl-Data-TreeDumper - Improved replacement for Data::Dumper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473716 manuel wolfshant [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 473716] Review Request: perl-Data-TreeDumper - Improved replacement for Data::Dumper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473716 Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||473727 --- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 10:56:25 EDT --- Almost there... [EMAIL PROTECTED] rpmlint perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35-1.fc11.noarch.rpm perl-Data-TreeDumper.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35/tie_bless.pl perl(AutoLoader) perl-Data-TreeDumper.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35/tie_bless.pl perl(Tie::Handle) perl-Data-TreeDumper.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35/tie_bless.pl perl(Tie::Array) perl-Data-TreeDumper.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35/tie_bless.pl perl(Devel::Peek) perl-Data-TreeDumper.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35/tie_bless.pl perl(Tie::Scalar) perl-Data-TreeDumper.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35/tie_bless.pl perl(Tie::Hash) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] rpm -qpv --requires perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35-1.fc11.noarch.rpm perl = 0:5.006 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(AutoLoader) perl(Carp) perl(Check::ISA) perl(Class::ISA) perl(Data::TreeDumper) perl(Devel::Peek) perl(Exporter) perl(Sort::Naturally) perl(Text::Wrap) perl(Tie::Array) perl(Tie::Handle) perl(Tie::Hash) perl(Tie::Scalar) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 the above are triggered by http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=962902name=perl-Data-TreeDumper-0.35-1.fc11.noarch.rpm (and after a local mock build) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #4 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2008-11-30 11:11:36 EDT ---
MD5 sum matches upstream.
$ md5sum xjparse-src-1.0.zip
8722e59eb5b7b1d1adebd8f39b8f93db xjparse-src-1.0.zip
Some comments:
Group: Applications/Text
License:ASL 2.0
These two lines have trailing whitespace.
%description
The xjparse tool is a simple command-line wrapper for the Xerces XML Schema
validator. It accepts several options, notably one which specifies the set of
schemas to be used during validation.
Nitpick: move of to the beginning of the following line.
cp -p build/xjparse.jar \
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_javadir}/%{name}-%{version}.jar
You might also need this:
ln -s %{name}-%{version}.jar $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_javadir}/%{name}.jar
Otherwise you need to specify xjparse-1.0 instead of just xjparse in
build-classpath call to run it:
java -cp `build-classpath xjparse-1.0 xml-commons-resolver`
com.nwalsh.parsers.xjparse
But if that's intentional then I have no objection. Most .jars installed in
%{_javadir} do have such symlinks though.
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{_javadir}/*
I know the template has this, but I'd rather you put the full path of the files
that get installed here, i.e.
%{_javadir}/%{name}-%{version}.jar
%{_javadir}/%{name}.jar
* Tue Nov 25 2008 Brennan Ashton bashton at, brennanashton.com 1.0-2
- Now noarch
- Fixed discription line length
* Sun Nov 23 2008 Brennan Ashton bashton at, brennanashton.com 1.0-1
- Created spec file
Put an empty line between changelog entries.
You were asking what to do if there's no licence text included in the source
archive:
- SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
Please do this then.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473330] Review Request: gmp-ecm - Elliptic Curve Method for Integer Factorization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473330
--- Comment #10 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 11:23:28
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: devel/x86_64
[x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM: empty
binary RPMs:
rpmlint of gmp-ecm:
gmp-ecm.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/gmp-ecm-6.2.1/AUTHORS
-- please use the same iconv/touch -r trick as on README
gmp-ecm.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 6.2.1-3 ['6.2.1-2.fc11',
'6.2.1-2']
-- you forgot to increase the release tag
rpmlint of gmp-ecm-devel: empty
rpmlint of gmp-ecm-static:
gmp-ecm-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation
-- ignorable
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: bb08c4f1b412110ef64572c387baa5bc45ae8a60
ecm-6.2.1.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[!] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Final provides and requires are sane.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English
languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: devel/x86_64
[?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[x] Package functions as described.
[x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the test passes.
=== Issues ===
1. Please use iconv to convert the AUTHORS file
2. You forgot to increase the release tag (you only modified the changelog).
And btw, you did not upload the new src.rpm, I used only the new spec and
rebuilt the src.rpm locally.
3. Are you sure that the -static package needs the -devel? I would test, but I
am not sure that I know how to do 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 473775] Review Request: gpshell - GPShell is a script interpreter which talks to a smart card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 Jesse Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Jesse Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 12:45:54 EDT --- Driveby comment, the summary is a bit wrong. You shouldn't repeat the name of the package in the summary. Script interpreter which talks to smart cards or even Smart Card script interpreter -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473330] Review Request: gmp-ecm - Elliptic Curve Method for Integer Factorization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473330 --- Comment #11 from Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 13:11:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) 3. Are you sure that the -static package needs the -devel? I would test, but I am not sure that I know how to do it Yes. Think about it. Just because you're statically linking against a library doesn't mean you don't need the header files when compiling your code. New URLs: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/gmp-ecm.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/gmp-ecm-6.2.1-4.fc9.src.rpm (Actually, I did upload the new SRPM last time, it was just to the old URL, because I forgot to bump the Release. I have an automated script to upload specs/srpms/rpms to fedorapeople.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 - 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 #22 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 13:39:03
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #21)
(In reply to comment #17)
This build contains more fixes, as well as including the jeuclid-fod and
jeuclid-mathviewer subpackages. I cannot build the jeuclid-cli until
commons-cli is updated bug 473373 . I have had to write a new build script
based on the Debian one as the ones included do not work well with fedora
package build structure. I still need to do the GUI stuff for
jeclid-mathviewer.
SRPM: http://bashton.fedorapeople.org/jeuclid-3.1.3-7.fc9.src.rpm
SPEC: http://bashton.fedorapeople.org/jeuclid.spec
This specfile is older than the one in the src.rpm.
looks like I forgot to dump the spec file over sorry for that.
Requires: fop = 0.95
Does it work only with this version? Will it have to be rebuilt when fop is
upgraded to a newer version?
Yes, upstream highly recommends this as this fop plugin development is so
closely tied to fop development.
(cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_javadir} for jar in *-%{version}*; do ln -sf ${jar}
`echo $jar| sed s|-%{version}||g`; done)
This could be rewritten as:
pushd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_javadir}
for jar in *-%{version}*; do
ln -sf ${jar} `echo $jar| sed s|-%{version}||g`
done
popd
Which is more readable IMHO, but I'm not insisting on it. Also, the usage of
'|' in sed expression is a bit unusual. I suggest plain slash ('/') instead.
It looks very nice otherwise.
It is going to be a busy week for me, but I will try to get the latest out with
the GUI and Javadocs stuff 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 444366] Review Request: deco - Extractor for various archive file formats
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444366 Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #26 from Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 13:49:39 EDT --- 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 469585] Review Request: moon-buggy - Drive and jump with some car across the moon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469585 Christopher Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: moon-buggy |Review Request: moon-buggy |- Drive and jump with some |- Drive and jump with some |car accros the moon |car across the moon --- Comment #10 from Christopher Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 13:51:22 EDT --- The word across is misspelled in the Summary tag, please 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 469134] Review Request: deco-archive - Extraction scripts for various archive formats for use of deco
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469134 Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469134] Review Request: deco-archive - Extraction scripts for various archive formats for use of deco
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469134 Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 14:02:18 EDT --- I'm not sure about the dependencies for the default archivers - wouldn't things just work for them with triggers as well? I'd personally remove them and do everything with triggers, but if you want to keep the default set, I think it would be good to add rpm to it - it's quite likely that it is installed on Fedora systems. In any case, it would be good to own everything that is not actually installed as usual in /var/lib/deco using %ghost. See the bash-completion package for an example how to do this. There's something wrong with for example the tar.lzma trigger. For me it installs a symlink: /var/lib/deco/tar.lzma - ../../../usr/share/deco-archive/tar.lzma which is broken - there's no tar.lzma in /usr/share/deco-archive here. tar\.lzma on the other hand is there, and I suppose tar\.lzma should be in /var/lib/deco instead of tar.lzma as well. At least the unrar and p7zip triggers could have a similar problem, maybe others with special chars as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473775] Review Request: gpshell - Manage applets on GlobalPlatform and OpenPlatform smart cards
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: gpshell - |Review Request: gpshell - |GPShell is a script |Manage applets on |interpreter which talks to |GlobalPlatform and |a smart card|OpenPlatform smart cards -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473775] Review Request: gpshell - Manage applets on GlobalPlatform and OpenPlatform smart cards
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473775 --- Comment #4 from François Kooman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 15:43:34 EDT --- Fixed summary: Spec URL: http://users.tuxed.net/fkooman/rpmbuild/SPECS/gpshell.spec SRPM URL: http://users.tuxed.net/fkooman/rpmbuild/SRPMS/gpshell-1.4.2-3.fc10.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 473046] Review Request: miniupnpc - command line tool to control NAT in UPnP-enabled routers as Linksys, D-Link etc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473046
--- Comment #14 from Avi Alkalay [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 16:48:38 EDT
---
I was passing the compilation flags on %build like this:
make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS=%{optflags} -DNDEBUG
But in some gcc calls it was not working. Apparently miniupnpc Makefile is not
very robust. So I did this:
make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS=%{optflags} -DNDEBUG CC=gcc %{optflags}
-DNDEBUG
About the x86_64 issues, I can't really help because I don't access to this
platform to test it. Hope you won't ask me to build it on an s390x too :-)
Seriously, how I can get access to a x86_64 machine to fix it? Does Fedora
Project provides one for build purposes ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473822] New: Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473822 Summary: Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window 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://www.sharms.org/files/terminator.spec SRPM URL: http://www.sharms.org/files/terminator-0.11-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Multiple GNOME terminals in one window This is a project to produce an efficient way of filling a large area of screen space with terminals. This is done by splitting the window into a resizeable grid of terminals. As such, you can produce a very flexible arrangements of terminals for different tasks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473822] Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473822 Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #1 from Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 17:21:11 EDT --- This application has a bug open for review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462173 This request should be closed? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465897] Review Request: Judy - General purpose dynamic array library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465897 --- Comment #11 from Charles R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 17:18:05 EDT --- Spec URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy.spec SRPM URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy-1.0.4-3.fc10.src.rpm Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=964814 * Thu Nov 30 2008 Charles R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.0.4-3 - fix Judy1 man page symlinks - use valid tag License: LGPLv2+ confirmed with upstream - use version macro in Source0 - remove Makefiles from installed doc tree Regarding the license, upstream has confirmed that the current license is LGPL v2.1 or later. Also, the source code is really the final say on this, and it says GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Either way, Fedora spec files don't distinguish between v2.1 and v2, so this is specified as LGPLv2+ for the spec file. From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 27 21:45:54 2008 From: Doug Baskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Chuck Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 18:45:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Judy license confusion - (LGPL v2.1 or later applies) Reply-To: Doug Baskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chuck: I did not know a new version of LGPL existed. You are correct, the COPYING file is correct (LGPL v2.1 or later applies). I will change the README file to reflect that in the next release of Judy. ... However, the author has noted that the license may change in a future release to just LGPLv2. I'll be sure to update the License tag and notify fedora-devel-list if/when such a new release is imported into Fedora: From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 28 19:09:55 2008 From: Doug Baskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Chuck Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:09:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Judy license confusion Reply-To: Doug Baskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chuck: I have been requested by Hewlett-Packard to REMOVE the or (at your option) later version part of the wording from Judy sources. Apparently the v3 License is not acceptable to a lot of people and companies with regard to the patent section. If I do not do this, HP personnel cannot support me in the future. Sorry about that. I suspect that this problem will get sorted out in the future. (Sometimes I hate politics or perhaps Lawyers). Doug Doug Baskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473822] Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473822 --- Comment #2 from Steven Harms [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 17:27:37 EDT --- I have submitted my SPECFILE to upstream, and this one actually builds on FC10. Original spec submitted was for 0.10, which is an older release. This is for 0.11, and is tested working. I am not very familiar with the Fedora process, but I believe that the spec file I have created should replace the former. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #31 from Nicoleau Fabien [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 18:01:46 EDT --- Perhaps I've build edb for rawhide to early. Summary and description are still the old ones. May be it will change when I'll build an update for 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 473205] Review Request: gPlanarity - puzzle 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=473205 --- Comment #7 from Adam Tulinius [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 18:14:32 EDT --- - Version-scheme has been adjusted to match the kismet-example on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages , more or less. - vendor=fedora has been removed from the install-desktop-file call. spec: http://adamt.fedorapeople.org/pkg/gplanarity/gplanarity.spec srpm: http://adamt.fedorapeople.org/pkg/gplanarity/gplanarity-0-0.1.20081130svn11946.fc10.src.rpm koji-run: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=964888 I also ditched most of the changelog-entries, because it seemed silly :-) - Adam -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469134] Review Request: deco-archive - Extraction scripts for various archive formats for use of deco
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469134
--- Comment #4 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30
18:25:21 EDT ---
Thanks,
(In reply to comment #3)
I'm not sure about the dependencies for the default archivers - wouldn't
things
just work for them with triggers as well? I'd personally remove them and do
everything with triggers, but if you want to keep the default set, I think it
would be good to add rpm to it - it's quite likely that it is installed on
Fedora systems.
I opted to make a default archivers list for simplicity. The script has to be
more complicated for such cases as:
- the user has tar and gz but not bz2
In such a case I have to use smart nested if-clauses for the trigger functions
of bz2 and tar.
Since a user who wants to deal with archives will probably have all of these
archivers anyways and they are all loaded by most installations, I don't think
it is worth the trouble to make the code to so complicated.
In any case, it would be good to own everything that is not actually installed
as usual in /var/lib/deco using %ghost. See the bash-completion package for
an
example how to do this.
I tried doing this. But I couldn't figure out how to escape the special
characters such as [ { ) in the filenames in the %files section. The obvious \[
\{ etc. escapes don't work. Here is what I did:
SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/deco-archive.spec
SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.src.rpm
Note that this SRPM does not build. It fails with:
RPM build errors:
File not found by glob:
/home/orcan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.x86_64/var/lib/deco/7z\.[0-9]{2,}
File not found by glob:
/home/orcan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.x86_64/var/lib/deco/ace|[c0-9][0-9]{2}
File not found by glob:
/home/orcan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.x86_64/var/lib/deco/part[0-9]+\.rar
File not found by glob:
/home/orcan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.x86_64/var/lib/deco/rar|[rst][0-9]{2}
File not found by glob:
/home/orcan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.x86_64/var/lib/deco/t7z\.[0-9]{2,}
File not found by glob:
/home/orcan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/deco-archive-1.2-4.fc10.x86_64/var/lib/deco/tar\.7z\.[0-9]{2,}
I asked about this to many people but nobody could figure this out. Any
suggestions?
Also the SPEC file is kind of ugly right now. I don't know how to simplify the
part with
( if x$i=xbz2 || x$i=xcpio ||...|| x$i=xtar )
in the %install section and also the
%{_var}/lib/deco/bz2
%{_var}/lib/deco/cpio
...
%{_var}/lib/deco/tar
part in the %files section.
There's something wrong with for example the tar.lzma trigger. For me it
installs a symlink: /var/lib/deco/tar.lzma -
../../../usr/share/deco-archive/tar.lzma which is broken - there's no
tar.lzma in /usr/share/deco-archive here. tar\.lzma on the other hand is
there, and I suppose tar\.lzma should be in /var/lib/deco instead of
tar.lzma as well. At least the unrar and p7zip triggers could have a
similar
problem, maybe others with special chars as well.
Thanks for the catch. Yes, there was a problem with tar\.lzma. The others are
fine as far as I tested.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426754] Review Request: ghc-xmonad-contrib - Third party extensions for xmonad
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426754 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||426752 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426754] Review Request: ghc-xmonad-contrib - Third party extensions for xmonad
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426754 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||426750 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426750] Review Request: ghc-utf8-string - Support reading and writing UTF8 Strings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426750 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||426754 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell bindings to the Xft, X Free Type interface library, and some Xrender parts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426752 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||426754 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell bindings to the Xft, X Free Type interface library, and some Xrender parts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426752 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://hackage.haskell.org/ ||cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/pac ||kage/X11-xft --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 19:05:50 EDT --- Yaakov, do you still have a copy of your .spec file? (Above links are broken.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473835] New: Review Request: autoarchive - Simple backup tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: autoarchive - Simple backup tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473835 Summary: Review Request: autoarchive - Simple backup tool 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://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/autoarchive.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/autoarchive-0.1.1-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://autoarchive.sourceforge.net/ Description: AutoArchive is a simple utility for making backups more easily. It uses tar for creating archives. The idea of the program is that every information needed for making a backup is in one file - the archive spec file. Path to this file is passed as a parameter to 'aa' command which reads informations from it and creates desired backup. Koji scratch builds: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=964944 rpmlint output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] noarch]$ rpmlint auto* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint auto* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473822] Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473822 --- Comment #3 from Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 19:37:35 EDT --- You might want to review the following links to learn more about the Fedora Process. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462173] Review Request: terminator - the robot future of terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462173 Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #11 from Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 19:51:36 EDT --- *** Bug 473822 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 473822] Review Request: terminator - easily allows multiple terminals in 1 window
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473822 Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Robert 'Bob' Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 19:51:36 EDT --- Please work with the people involved in Bug 462173 to get this package through review and in to Fedora. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 462173 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472673] Review Request: pyglet - A cross-platform windowing and multimedia 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=472673 Paulo Roma Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 20:17:38 EDT --- This is a duplicate of this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468298 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462173] Review Request: terminator - the robot future of terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462173 --- Comment #12 from Steven Harms [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 20:56:26 EDT --- I have created an update specfile which builds on FC10. Please review this as I believe it is the most correct, it is based off of the spec file distributed with upstream, and I have submitted it in their bug tracker also. http://www.sharms.org/files/terminator.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469134] Review Request: deco-archive - Extraction scripts for various archive formats for use of deco
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469134 --- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 22:57:54 EDT --- OK, I worked-around the issue. I sed'ed the contents of the ghost list and replaced each non-alphanumeric character in the filenames with ?. Here are the new files: SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/deco-archive.spec SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/deco-archive-1.2-5.fc10.src.rpm The package builds and runs as desired. But I'm open to suggestions for the improvement of the code. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472673] Review Request: pyglet - A cross-platform windowing and multimedia 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=472673 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||CANTFIX --- Comment #4 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-30 23:08:02 EDT --- As is explained on the link of the previous comment, pyglet depends heavily on a patent encumbered algorithm and hence cannot be included in Fedora. Submitting to rpmfusion. Closed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438452] Review Request: java-gnome: Java GNOME bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438452 --- Comment #13 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-01 00:14:54 EDT --- Pretty simple, really; a reviewer needs to do a proper 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 472848] Review Request: jeuclid - 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 #23 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-01 02:00:17 EDT --- Ok the rendering issue is fixed in F10, so it looks like soon as commons-cli is updated I will be able to roll out a srpm that has the .desktop javadocs and wrappers 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 472848] Review Request: jeuclid - 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 Bug 472848 depends on bug 473734, which changed state. Bug 473734 Summary: openjdk renders incorrectly for jeuclid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473734 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #5 from Brennan Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-01 02:01:57 EDT --- I have emailed upstream and am waiting for a response. Fixed those couple of issues, all I need to do is write the wrapper script. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
