[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
--- Comment #4 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-04
03:22:50 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
No no, that's not necessary at all, just remove the flags, e.g. by inserting:
sed -i -e 's/-fno-exceptions -fno-check-new -fno-common//' \
-e 's/-fno-threadsafe-statics -fvisibility=hidden
-fvisibility-inlines-hidden//' \
-e 's/-ansi//' %{_target_platform}/CMakeFiles/translatoid.dir/flags.make
I've confirmed that flags.make is where the sed command looks for it. But,
rpmbuild still wants to install the flags. I've not included the sed command in
the spec file.
All other indicated corrections and implied suggestions (visa vi Google).
All files seem to pass the rpmlint test
Spec URL:
http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec
Spec URL:
ftp://orbsky.homelinux.org/pub/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec
SRPM URL:
http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-2.fc10.src.rpm
SRPM URL:
ftp://orbsky.homelinux.org/pub/packages/http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-2.fc10.src.rpm
Any additional help with removing the flags from the package would be greatly
appreciated.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 --- Comment #7 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-04 03:29:52 EDT --- So... am I clear to move this to koji? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226463] Merge Review: system-config-netboot
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226463 --- Comment #17 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 03:34:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) Thanks for your work. APPROVED. Ok, thank you for your great review! -- 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 483045] Review Request: perl-Test-Unit-Lite - Unit testing without external dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483045 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 03:55:32 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i386). koji Build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1103094 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url bad27502bda4377fa6e7e39602b82aab Test-Unit-Lite-0.1101.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=2, Tests=54, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.66 cusr 0.02 csys = 0.71 CPU) + Package perl-Test-Unit-Lite-0.1101-1.fc11 = Provides: perl(Test::Unit::Debug) perl(Test::Unit::HarnessUnit) perl(Test::Unit::Lite) = 0.11 perl(Test::Unit::Lite::AllTests) perl(Test::Unit::Result) perl(Test::Unit::TestCase) perl(Test::Unit::TestRunner) perl(Test::Unit::TestSuite) Requires: perl = 0:5.006 perl(Carp) perl(Cwd) perl(Exporter) perl(File::Basename) perl(File::Copy) perl(File::Find) perl(File::Path) perl(File::Spec) perl(Symbol) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(warnings) Suggestions: 1) Take care to remove BR:perl before committing to cvs Another thing, I see META.yml specifies which provides: this package should provide which this package already providing so I see no filter required here. 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 477542] Review Request: mpdscribble - A mpd client which submits information about tracks being played to Last.fm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477542 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 03:54:44 EDT --- OK, some additional steps (because of updated srpm): + The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [pe...@host-12-116 SOURCES]$ md5sum mpdscribble-0.16.tar.bz2* deeeb403ebd50b7abacd1eeabc96b320 mpdscribble-0.16.tar.bz2 deeeb403ebd50b7abacd1eeabc96b320 mpdscribble-0.16.tar.bz2.from_srpm [pe...@host-12-116 SOURCES]$ + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on all primary architectures. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1103246 This package is == == == APPROVED == == == Your next steps are: * Wait for someone, who sponsors you (I cannot sponsor you). * Request cvs branches (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure ) * Proceed from step 8 at this page - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/NewPackageProcess -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483868] Review Request: iscan-firmware - Firmware for Epson flatbed scanners
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483868 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 03:57:35 EDT --- I'll review 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 476471] Review Request: fedora-security-guide - A security guide for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476471 --- Comment #45 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 04:02:59 EDT --- If you have new urls, please post them 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 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 --- Comment #8 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 04:13:21 EDT --- - rpmlint output is clean - OK - license is now clear (GPLv2) - OK - sources md5 - OK - koji scratch build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1103293 - OK - works as expected - OK It's OK for me, Rex, it's now your turn. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483868] Review Request: iscan-firmware - Firmware for Epson flatbed scanners
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483868
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 04:12:08
EDT ---
Remarks:
* No idea what is AVASYS Public License (rpmlint also shouts that it doesn't
know what is it), however it looks like Distributable, No Modifications
Permitted.
* I found that there are different versions of AVASYS Public License - dated as
2008-04-01 and as 2005-04.01.
* There is also another one license, named LICENSE.EPSON.{en,ja}.txt.
* Missing BR: udev ( rpm -qf /lib/firmware )
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483846] Review Request: gsim85 - An 8085 microprocessor simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483846 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-04 04:23:02 EDT --- I filled a bug about the statement in the source file header. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483846] Review Request: gsim85 - An 8085 microprocessor simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483846 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-04 04:26:24 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gsim85 Short Description: An 8085 microprocessor simulator Owners: fab Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474356] Review Request: trilead-ssh2 - SSH-2 protocol implementation in pure Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474356 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #14 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 04:32:51 EDT --- I'll review 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 474356] Review Request: trilead-ssh2 - SSH-2 protocol implementation in pure Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474356
--- Comment #15 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-02-04
05:01:51 EDT ---
OK package named correctly
OK spec file named correctly
OK meets the Packaging Guidelines (except for above)
OK license is correct, approved and in %doc
OK license field in the package spec file matches the actual license
OK package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least
one primary architecture (compiles on x86 cleanly)
OK owns all directories
OK doesn't contain any duplicate files
OK permissions are correctly set
OK clean section present
OK uses macros consistently
OK package contains code
OK no large documentation files
OK if a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application.
OK packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
OK %install MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK all filenames must be valid UTF-8
The only remaining issue is
file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/trilead-ssh2-213/HISTORY.txt
Michaël is not actually UTF-8 in this file.
Just put the next line in the %prep and we are good to go.
iconv -f ISO-8859-1 -t UTF-8 -o HISTORY.txt HISTORY.txt
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483499] Review Request: python-ferari - Optimizer for finite element code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483499 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-04 05:12:28 EDT --- External Bug report about the license file for tracking reasons http://www.fenics.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483846] Review Request: gsim85 - An 8085 microprocessor simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483846 --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-04 05:15:04 EDT --- External Bug reports for tracking http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=2563186group_id=147440atid=768435 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=2562577group_id=147440atid=768435 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=2561951group_id=175471atid=873367 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=2561937group_id=175471atid=873367 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483501] Review Request: python-fiat - Generation of arbitrary order instances of the Lagrange elements
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483501 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-04 05:12:43 EDT --- External Bug report about the license file for tracking reasons http://www.fenics.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #6 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-04 05:19:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) These compilation flags are not uncommon for KDE (or C++) sources, e.g. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=81037 Without a doubt. However, the compilation flag suggested did not work. And since I am no programmer, I would be very hard pressed to know the correct flags or syntax. Hence, the request for additional assistance. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483277] Review Request: nautilus-gdu - Nautilus extension for disk formatting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483277 --- Comment #7 from Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala huzai...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 05:56:11 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 483277] Review Request: nautilus-gdu - Nautilus extension for disk formatting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483277 Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala huzai...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225707] Merge Review: dosfstools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225707 Stepan Kasal ska...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are 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 483933] New: Review Request: perl-autobox - Call methods on native types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-autobox - Call methods on native types https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483933 Summary: Review Request: perl-autobox - Call methods on native types Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: allis...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-autobox/perl-autobox.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-autobox/perl-autobox-2.55-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The autobox pragma allows methods to be called on integers, floats, strings, arrays, hashes, and code references in exactly the same manner as blessed references. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 482807] Review Request: libfli - Library for FLI CCD Camera Filter Wheels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=482807 --- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 06:45:23 EDT --- rpmlint output: libfli.src: E: description-line-too-long Finger Lakes Instrument library is used by applications to control FLI line of CCDs and Filter wheels - wrap long line libfli-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation - ok, no devel 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 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #8 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 06:21:27 EDT --- - rpmlint output is clean - OK problems: - capitalize description - do not use TM - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Trademarks_in_Summary_or_Description -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 482807] Review Request: libfli - Library for FLI CCD Camera Filter Wheels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=482807 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #9 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-04 07:29:31 EDT --- OK... That should be that except for the flag issue. Spec URL: http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec Spec URL: ftp://orbsky.homelinux.org/pub/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec SRPM URL: http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-3.fc10.src.rpm SRPM URL: ftp://orbsky.homelinux.org/pub/packages/http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-3.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 483438] Review Request: libindi - Instrument Neutral Distributed 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=483438 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.com 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 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #10 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 08:15:30 EDT --- And maybe at least description should be more informative - it's Plasma widget etc... I'm really not sure about inclusion of flags - we should wait until someone from KDE-SIG asks Fedora legal/board - KDE-SIG is planning to ask... Without approval from them I can't approve this package for Fedora. Or we can prepare patch to show label instead flag. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483277] Review Request: nautilus-gdu - Nautilus extension for disk formatting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483277 Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Tomáš Bžatek tbza...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 08:15:16 EDT --- Successfully built in rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=81493 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484042] New: Review Request: vlgothic-fonts - Japanese TrueType fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: vlgothic-fonts - Japanese TrueType fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484042 Summary: Review Request: vlgothic-fonts - Japanese TrueType fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ta...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/vlgothic-fonts/vlgothic-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/vlgothic-fonts/vlgothic-fonts-20090204-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: VLGothic provides Japanese TrueType fonts from the Vine Linux project. Most of the glyphs are taken from the M+ and Sazanami Gothic fonts, but some have also been improved by the project. This package will replaces VLGothic-fonts package during the package renaming transition because of applying new font packaging policy. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484042] Review Request: vlgothic-fonts - Japanese TrueType fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484042 Akira TAGOH ta...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-fonts-bugs-l...@redh ||at.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480215] Review Request: slsnif - Serial line sniffer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480215 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-04 05:31:49 EDT --- I will look deeper into this after FOSDEM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483438] Review Request: libindi - Instrument Neutral Distributed 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=483438 --- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 09:12:05 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=330864) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=330864) LIB_SUFFIX patch Same style patch as for libfli. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480851] Review Request: ccrypt - Secure encryption and decryption of files and streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480851 --- Comment #3 from Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be 2009-02-04 09:21:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Good. Wondering if the following line is relevant for the description: which is the U.S. government's chosen candidate for the Advanced Encryption Standard. Your call. I removed some sentences. Thanks - it is much better. Will you be able to fix the build problem on PPC? Otherwise, add a tag to exclude it. Via koji I was able to build on ppc. I will exclude ppc64 for the moment. This is my second package with issues about openssl on ppcX. Thanks - acceptable for me. - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. You need the glibc-devel package for -lcrypt I don't think that I need glibc-devel. The koji log shows that the check for -lcrypt is ok without BR glibc-devel. But maybe I'm mistaken... Hum, is indeed strange, but your comment is correct. It works nice without it. So, unless somebody complains do not use in the spec file. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1100286name=build.log Updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/ccrypt.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/ccrypt-1.7-2.fc9.src.rpm The SRPM URL was wrong! The correct URL is: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/ccrypt-1.7-2.fc10.src.rpm Next actions are: 1/ final approval of the spec and RPM/SRPM packages of an official approver is still needed 2/ finding a sponsor, but you did not need one according to your comment #2 Thanks, go ahead - for me it's fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #12 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-02-04 10:19:09 EDT --- These compilation flags are not uncommon for KDE (or C++) sources, e.g. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=81037 Do you mean we should leave them as they are? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467642] Review Request: sugar-read - PDF reader 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=467642 Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||to...@sugarlabs.org --- Comment #5 from Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org 2009-02-04 10:19:45 EDT --- evince 2.25.90 and gnome-python-desktop 2.25.90 have been released and would be enough to run sugar-read. sugar-evince is not needed any more as has been completely upstreamed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
--- Comment #11 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-02-04 10:18:14
EDT ---
Wait wait -- I just realized that I'm not sure whether we speak about the same
issue: What I told you is how to remove the additional non-Fedora GCC compiler
flags. I revisited the sed script, it was just wrong wrapped after pasting into
bugzilla, hence once again:
sed -i -e 's/-fno-exceptions -fno-check-new -fno-common//' \
-e 's/-fno-threadsafe-statics -fvisibility=hidden
-fvisibility-inlines-hidden//' \
-e 's/-ansi//' %{_target_platform}/CMakeFiles/translatoid.dir/flags.make
This should definitely help to get rid of all of the flags, yesterday I
downloaded your SRPM and tested it.
!Note: This has *nothing* to do with the country flags, it's completely
unrelated.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480944] Review Request: perl-Test-Harness-Straps - Detailed analysis of test results
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480944 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||msu...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|msu...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 10:27:00 EDT --- I will look on this review. Please consider adding fedora-perl-devel-l...@redhat.com to cc when you create new Review Request of perl package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484057] New: Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484057 Summary: Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: scart...@learn.senecac.on.ca QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://matrix.senecac.on.ca/~scarter4/epigrafica-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://matrix.senecac.on.ca/~scarter4/epigrafica-fonts-1.01-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: A font family based on the Optima designs by HermannZapf, made by the Department of Mathematics of the University of the Aegean. This is my first package to be reviewed, and I am looking for a sponser. Any feedback is most definitely welcome! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484057] Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484057 Stephen Carter scart...@learn.senecac.on.ca 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 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #13 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 10:33:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) Wait wait -- I just realized that I'm not sure whether we speak about the same issue: What I told you is how to remove the additional non-Fedora GCC compiler flags. I revisited the sed script, it was just wrong wrapped after pasting into bugzilla, hence once again: ... !Note: This has *nothing* to do with the country flags, it's completely unrelated. So it's misunderstanding - country flags are legal problem! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484051] Review Request: sockettest - Test My Socket
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484051 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||sockettest -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-SystemTapGui - GUI interface for SystemTap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205 --- Comment #11 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 10:47:12 EDT --- I will sponsor Anithra. I will also review this package sometime before Friday. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480944] Review Request: perl-Test-Harness-Straps - Detailed analysis of test results
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480944
Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 10:56:22 EDT
---
You forgot to set flag fedora‑review? setting it for you.
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
SEE LATER - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
b72c0aa8950a6dfc1908b884fc768577 for both
N/A - Package needs ExcludeArch
FAIL - BuildRequires correct
N/A - Spec handles locales/find_lang
N/A - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK- Doc subpackage needed/used.
N/A - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
N/A - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
N/A - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
N/A - .so files in -devel subpackage.
N/A - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
N/A - .la files are removed.
N/A - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file
FAIL - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
FAIL - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane:
(include output of for i in *rpm; do echo $i; rpm -qp --provides $i; echo =;
rpm -qp --requires $i; echo; done
perl-Test-Harness-Straps-0.30-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
perl(Test::Harness::Assert) = 0.02
perl(Test::Harness::Iterator) = 0.02
perl(Test::Harness::Iterator::ARRAY)
perl(Test::Harness::Iterator::FH)
perl(Test::Harness::Point) = 0.01
perl(Test::Harness::Results) = 0.01
perl(Test::Harness::Straps) = 0.30
perl-Test-Harness-Straps = 0.30-1.fc11
=
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
perl(Config)
perl(Exporter)
perl(Test::Harness::Assert)
perl(Test::Harness::Iterator)
perl(Test::Harness::Point)
perl(Test::Harness::Results)
perl(strict)
perl(vars)
SHOULD Items:
OK, tested on x86_64 - Should build in mock.
OK - Should build on all supported archs
Didn't test - Should function as described.
No scriptlets - Should have sane scriptlets.
N/A - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
N/A - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
TODO:
please add build requires: perl(Test::More)
it is no more part of perl itself in Fedora 11
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1103852
and try to build is as --scratch in koji
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484051] New: Review Request: sockettest - Test My Socket
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sockettest - Test My Socket https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484051 Summary: Review Request: sockettest - Test My Socket Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ispbrasil.com.br/sockettest/sockettest.spec SRPM URL: http://ispbrasil.com.br/sockettest/sockettest-3.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: A java tool for socket testing. It can create both TCP and UDP client or server. It can be used to test any server or client that uses TCP or UDP protocol to communicate. koji scratch build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1103804 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484049] New: Review Request: emacs-common-proofgeneral - Emacs mode for standard interaction interface for proof assistants
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: emacs-common-proofgeneral - Emacs mode for standard interaction interface for proof assistants https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484049 Summary: Review Request: emacs-common-proofgeneral - Emacs mode for standard interaction interface for proof assistants Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: amd...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~amd34/pg/emacs-common-proofgeneral.spec SRPM URL: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~amd34/pg/emacs-common-proofgeneral-3.7.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: See after description for comments on things I have already done to test this spec file. (from spec file) Proof General is a generic front-end for proof assistants (also known as interactive theorem provers) based on Emacs. Proof General allows one to edit and submit a proof script to a proof assistant in an interactive manner: - It tracks the goal state, and the script as it is submitted, and allows for easy backtracking and block execution. - It adds toolbars and menus to Emacs for easy access to proof assistant features. - It integrates with X-Symbol for some provers to provide output using proper mathematical symbols. - It includes utilities for generating Emacs tags for proof scripts, allowing for easy navigation. Proof General supports a number of different proof assistants (Isabelle, Coq, PhoX, and LEGO to name a few) and is designed to be easily extendable to work with others. Tests: - Runs on my machine (F10 i386) in both emacs and xemacs (even when both packages are simultaneously installed) - Builds in mock - rpmlint output: [ad...@localhost rpmbuild]$ rpmlint SPECS/emacs-common-proofgeneral.spec RPMS/noarch/*proofgeneral* emacs-proofgeneral.noarch: W: no-documentation emacs-proofgeneral-el.noarch: W: no-documentation xemacs-proofgeneral.noarch: W: no-documentation xemacs-proofgeneral-el.noarch: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. I am under the impression that the separate subpackages for compiled elisp and elisp files do not need separate documentation (which is the source of these warnings). I saw this warning in other emacs-involved RPMS that I downloaded. If that is not correct, it can be easily corrected. Concerns: I think this spec file is essentially correct, but I thought I might point out an issue or two for any potential reviewer: 1) There is a desktop file to run the proofgeneral script. I can imagine the script being useful for other programs to call, but I'm not sure the gui way of running this has any real purpose (all it is going to do is run emacs/xemacs - the proofgeneral script with no arguments). I have not currently installed the desktop file but left it in the package for those that might want to examine it. Does that sound like a reasonable compromise? 2) I added a somewhat Fedora-specific patch that modifies the proofgeneral script just mentioned. It might be good to examine whether this is an alright way of accomplishing what was desired: independence of emacs variant (emacs/xemacs) in a way that works for Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483865] Review Request: bpg-fonts - Georgian Unicode fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483865 --- Comment #3 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 09:54:37 EDT --- Should the symlinks be relative, or is rpmlint being too pedantic here? rpmlint's check here was decided by the FPC (and just ratified by FESCo) to be a bit too strict. I'm going to write this up today, but you can look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Symlinks , which says: There are two ways of making a symlink, either as a relative link or an absolute link. In Fedora, neither method is required. Packagers should use their best judgement when deciding which method of symlink creation is appropriate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #7 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 06:11:15 EDT --- I tried to install this widget and the problem is that it's unusable without flags - flags are used in language chooser... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 482807] Review Request: libfli - Library for FLI CCD Camera Filter Wheels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=482807 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.com 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 483438] Review Request: libindi - Instrument Neutral Distributed 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=483438
--- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 09:48:15
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: f10 / x86_64
[!] Rpmlint output: not clean
- libindi.src: W: strange-permission libindi0_0.6.tar.gz 0400
- libindi.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libindi.so.0.6
e...@glibc_2.2.5
[-] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
[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.
- Tarball includes licenses in its own file only for LGPL, not GPL. As GPL
is stated in right sources I don't think this is blocker but should be
better to ask upstream.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[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.
[-] 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 %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[!] Package consistently uses macros.
- Please do not use %{__ macros and use only command, I talked to RPM
developer and FESCo member and they do not like it. But this is not
a blocker, feel free to select one consistent style.
[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.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, 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.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[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.
[?] Reviewer should test that the package builds in koji.
- libfli not in koji
[?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
- libfli not in koji
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== SUMMARY ===
- Clean rpmlint output
- Ask upstream about licenses
- Check macros
- Check in Koji once libfli is in
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 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 483016] Package Review: perl-NOCpulse-Debug - Perl debug output package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483016
--- Comment #7 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 11:20:17 EDT
---
I removed ownership of ${_sysconfdir}/nocpulse
added LICENSE
did not add README since upstream (that me :) do not provide any README
Updated SPEC:
http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/perl-NOCpulse-Debug/perl-NOCpulse-Debug.spec
Updated SRPM:
http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/perl-NOCpulse-Debug/perl-NOCpulse-Debug-1.23.15-1.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 428568] Review Request: synfig - Synfig is a vector based 2D animation package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428568 --- Comment #28 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 04:51:10 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=330847) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=330847) strace ouput while using synfig There is few things that I feel as very annoying for * First there is the synfig_module.cfg needs: usually libtool-ltdl modules doesn't need to be hardcoded in such file. That will be hard to extend the functionnalities of synfig if we need to register every module using this. * Then, it seems that the modules implementation settle on the needs of the libtool .la files. This is very annoying and needs to be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.com 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 483045] Review Request: perl-Test-Unit-Lite - Unit testing without external dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483045 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 05:27:14 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Test-Unit-Lite Short Description: Unit testing without external dependencies Owners: allisson Branches: F-10 F-9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483865] Review Request: bpg-fonts - Georgian Unicode fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483865 --- Comment #2 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 09:52:50 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) ? Multiple different families are in the same upstream archive. They share a release date, but the subpackages have different Versions. Additionally, as stated above, one of the font families has a different license. Can you check with upstream about splitting these into one-archive-per-family? It would probably be better to split at least the one non-GPL font into a different archive, and probably a different SRPM altogether. I can check, but that would effectively be 15 zip files instead of just one. If it were me, I wouldn't do it. :) Upstream is probably unaware of the GPL incompatibility with the Bitstream Vera derived font. Font licensing compatibility is poorly understood. + Each family is in a separate subpackage. + naming follows projectname-fontfamilyname-fonts - SHOULD be built from sources, but font spec template says For GPLed or LGPLed fonts this is required by the license. %build section is empty. Is TTF the preferred source for modifying/building these fonts? If not, where is the source? TTF is typically the preferred source for modifying fonts, with tools like fontforge. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476460] Review Request: pymilter - Python interface to sendmail milter 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=476460 --- Comment #21 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-04 11:49:15 EDT --- I am not familiar with selinux, however I guess it is better that you ask Dan Walsh how to deal with this (maybe policy will be added in selinux-policy?) after this is 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 477570] Review Request: couchdb - A document database server, accessible via a RESTful JSON 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=477570 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 07:05:22 EDT --- I'll review 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 482807] Review Request: libfli - Library for FLI CCD Camera Filter Wheels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=482807
--- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 08:02:56
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: f10 / x86_64
[!] Rpmlint output: not clean, see previous comment
[-] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
[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: BSD
- LICENSE.BSD is 2 clause new BSD license with no advertising but sources
are under 3 clause BSD license. I think it's OK for review and it's not
blocker but ask upstream to match it.
[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.
[!] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
- md5 sums do not match!
[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.
[-] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] 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 %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[!] Package consistently uses macros.
- Please do not use %{__ macros and use only command, I talked to RPM
developer and FESCo member and they do not like it. But this is not
a blocker, feel free to select one consistent style.
[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.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, 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.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[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 koji.
Tested on: koji dist-f11
- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1103679
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: koji dist-f11
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== SUMMARY ===
- Clean rpmlint output
- Ask upstream about licenses
- Correct source tarball
- Check macros
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481224] Review Request: rabbitmq-server - An AMQP server written in Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481224 --- Comment #5 from Hubert Plociniczak hub...@lshift.net 2009-02-04 08:03:17 EDT --- Thanks for the review Peter. All of those seem reasonable and I will fix them promptly. But I've got one question regarding init-script run levels. I know that for example ejabberd also isn't started by default but it seems somehow natural for rabbit users that after reboot/crash the server is up again. Possibly run levels 2345 is too much and 3 5 would be definitely enough. Can you elaborate on the rationale against starting it by default? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript doesn't seem to be strictly against 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 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #14 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-04 12:10:16 EDT --- Ooops sorry about the misunderstanding. I thought you were pointing out an issue discussed relatively recently on the fedora-kde mailing list. So... OK.. Done. Spec URL: http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec Spec URL: ftp://orbsky.homelinux.org/pub/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec SRPM URL: http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-4.fc10.src.rpm SRPM URL: ftp://orbsky.homelinux.org/pub/packages/http://orbsky.homelinux.org/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-4.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 467410] Review Request: mingw32-libgcrypt - MinGW Windows gcrypt encryption 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=467410 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477570] Review Request: couchdb - A document database server, accessible via a RESTful JSON 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=477570
Hubert Plociniczak hub...@lshift.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hub...@lshift.net
--- Comment #2 from Hubert Plociniczak hub...@lshift.net 2009-02-04 12:58:41
EDT ---
I am sure Peter will follow with the proper review, but here are some bits that
I found in my informal review:
- put Requires(preun) into single line
- %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/couchdb instead of ${_sysconfdir}/default/couchdb
- you have
%exclude %{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/couchdb
%{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/couchdb
- use %{_initrddir} instead of %{_sysconfdir}
- init-script must not be marked as %config
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#Initscript_packaging)
- if you use %{_localstatedir} then use it consistently, for example in useradd
or sed
- use -D flag in 'install' instead of 'mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_initrddir}'
- remove 'exit 0' in %pre
- remove 'shadow-utils' since it is on ExceptionsList
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines)
- shouldn't mochiweb be a separate sub-package?
- fix the obvious rpmlint warnings, like permissions
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 453018, which changed state. Bug 453018 Summary: RfE: New release 1.1 of jakarta-commons-cli is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453018 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #38 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net 2009-02-04 13:29:46 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 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832 --- Comment #19 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-04 13:38:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) ! Please stop daemon on removal (not upgrade, i.e. [ $! = 0 ]) This is [ $1 = 0 ] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-SystemTapGui - GUI interface for SystemTap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205 --- Comment #12 from Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com 2009-02-04 13:41:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) I will sponsor Anithra. I will also review this package sometime before Friday. Thanks Andrew. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483846] Review Request: gsim85 - An 8085 microprocessor simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483846 Chitlesh GOORAH cgoo...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cgoo...@yahoo.com.au --- Comment #7 from Chitlesh GOORAH cgoo...@yahoo.com.au 2009-02-04 13:39:07 EDT --- Looking forward to add it under FEL-11 livedvd :D -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832
--- Comment #18 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-04
13:37:09 EDT ---
Now for 1.2.8.23-2:
* Scriptlets
- For user/group creation, please follow below:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups
- Again please check
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#Initscripts_in_spec_file_scriptlets
! Requires(preun): chkconfig, initscripts is missing (for initscripts
dependency see below)
! Please stop daemon on removal (not upgrade, i.e. [ $! = 0 ])
* attr
- For safety, please write %attr(0600,root,root) %config(noreplace)
on %{_sysconfdir}/mydns.conf explicitly.
! By the way is it okay that this file is not readable even from
mydns user/group?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481022] Review Request: SPE - Stani's Python Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481022 --- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-04 13:50:59 EDT --- Okay, then I will wait for your next srpm. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477526] Review Request: rubygem-hpricot - A Fast, Enjoyable HTML Parser 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=477526 --- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-04 13:51:59 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 468465] Review Request: posterazor - Make your own poster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468465 Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 13:53:12 EDT --- Thank you for the review. I'll modify the loop before import like that : for i in CHANGES LICENSE README do sed -e 's/\r//' $i $i.tmp touch -c -r $i $i.tmp mv $i.tmp $i done === New Package CVS Request === Package Name: posterazor Short Description: Make your own poster Owners: eponyme Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479585] Review Request: megaupload-dl - Megaupload automatic downloader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479585 --- Comment #23 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-02-04 14:34:50 EDT --- Ping mmahut -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480146] Review Request: python-bicyclerepair - Python Refactoring 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=480146 --- Comment #8 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-02-04 14:54:22 EDT --- Unfortunately, I have to find out, that we have to add 'BR python-devel' in opposite of my statement in #7. On my local system I could build it without this BR, but on dist-f11 it doesn't works properly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483543] Review Request: SystemTapGuiServer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543 --- Comment #4 from Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com 2009-02-04 14:55:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) This RPM will build on different architectures. Remove the following from the spec file: BuildArch: i386 Make the rpm file name agree with the one in: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205 Allow someone to do: yum install *stapgui* Thanks Will. I will rename the rpm to systemtapguiserver (removing camel casing) and will be renaming the client (bug 483205) to eclipse-systemtapgui. Will post the new package with all changes mentioned above shortly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484057] Review Request: epigrafica-fonts - The Epigrafica font family.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484057 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-04 15:29:40 EDT --- Some feedback (not a real complete review yet, you have some rework to do first) 1. your packaging is based on the templates we used 2/3 months ago. Since then a major new version has been approved. You need to read the current version of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy and adapt to it (in particular http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Technical_implementation but do read the rest, it has changed and been clarified too) The policy changes have been made to simplify packaging, trying to minimize the work needed to adapt current packages, so it should not be too hard for you. 2. your summary is not very informative 3. URL needs to be the font project homepage, your chosen URL is not really useful in a browser 4. since this entity creates other fonts, a foundry prefix would be a good idea in the naming (for example aegean) 5. since this you know this font is a cosmetica fork, which is itself an optima fork, you need to tell this to fontconfig via some substitution rules. fontpackages-devel has some templates you can follow to do this easily 6. since we've considerably simplified fonts packaging lately, we require at least *two* clean font package submissions before sponsoring someone. So you'll need another submission for this one to succeed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-04 15:50:32 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew Short Description: Removes the KDE Plasma Cashew From the Corner of the Display Owners: eliwap Branches: f-10 InitialCC: jreznik rdieter -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484042] Review Request: vlgothic-fonts - Japanese TrueType fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484042 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ta...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-04 16:09:12 EDT --- I'd have used vl-gothic not vlgothic but your choice is ok too. Upgrade paths work and the package looks sane. (catalogue is probably leftover cruft since you don't use it, and checking the package is ok would be easier if you used the same line order as the template, but that does not change the result) ☾☾☾ APPROVED ☾☾☾ Please do not forget to update comps -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480146] Review Request: python-bicyclerepair - Python Refactoring 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=480146 --- Comment #9 from Jerome Soyer sai...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 16:15:35 EDT --- Hi Jochen, Thanks for your work on python-bicyclerepair. I just reinstall my broken machine and reinstall a 64bit Fedora for testing it but you have been faster ;-) I will modify the spec and resubmit you a SRPM tomorrow :) Good evening ! I think python-devel BR must be, it's more safe no ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225856] Merge Review: gpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225856
--- Comment #12 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2009-02-04
16:42:16 EDT ---
Thank you for going on, rpmlint against latest CVS build (from http://
cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/gpm/gpm.spec?revision=1.69)
gpm.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libgpm.so.2.1.0
e...@glibc_2.2.5
Any ideas for this? That really looks strange to me - and I do not really
have a clue what causes this. See also below at the bottom of this comment.
gpm.src: W: strange-permission gpm.init 0755
gpm.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/gpm
gpm.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/gpm
gpm-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
gpm-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation
Ignore so far. GPM should be enabled per default, otherwise the service does
not make so much sense to me. Docs are not available and permission can't be
solved after wrong import (as eplained above).
%__cc %{?_smp_mflags} -o inputattach %{SOURCE2}
Well, we've lost $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. See build logs: %{?_smp_mflags} only causes
-jX, not the rest of the flags $RPM_OPT_FLAGS would bring. So please re-add.
Could you perform real integer comparisons rather half string comparisions?
-if [ $1 = 0 ]; then
+if [ $1 -eq 0 ]; then
-if [ $1 -ge 1 ]; then
+if [ $1 -ne 0 ]; then
Following is suggested to not break rpm transaction if something goes wrong:
-/sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/gpm.info.gz --delete %{_infodir}/dir
+/sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/gpm.info.gz --delete %{_infodir}/dir || :
Except of things raised above, I would say we're fine. Most hard seems to me
shared-lib-calls-exit - can we avoid it or can we just ignore the warning; I
had a look to bug #450011 and if I see correct, it depends on how it is done;
sometimes it can't be avoided. You know code better than me...suggestions?
--
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 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xja...@fi.muni.cz Flag|fedora-cvs? | --- Comment #10 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-02-04 16:55:37 EDT --- Eli, please wait for the reviewer to set the proper flag (fedora-review must be +, a ? indicates only that the reviewer is going to review the package and should be set right in the beginning). To Jreznik: If you wanted to approve the package by this comment: It's OK for me, Rex, it's now your turn. please set the proper flag and state that clearly, thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 --- Comment #11 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-02-04 17:07:08 EDT --- Moreover, Eli, please: the GCC flags should be corrected, you can do that in a similar way like I suggested you in the review of kde-plasma-translatoid. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483933] Review Request: perl-autobox - Call methods on native types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483933 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||msu...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|msu...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 17:19:41 EDT --- You forgot to set up fedora‑review? flag. I done that for you. I take this review and will do it tomorrow. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 --- Comment #12 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-04 17:29:43 EDT --- Eli: please be patient :) Milos: I didn't mean it as approved, we had deal with Rex to check this review and sponsor Eli. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481022] Review Request: SPE - Stani's Python Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481022 --- Comment #10 from MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 17:33:53 EDT --- rpmlint issue: ___ $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/spe.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.noarch.rpm spe.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/spe/_spe/Blender_signature.py BPY spe.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/spe/_spe/spe_blender.py BPY spe.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/spe/_spe/winpdb_blender.py BPY 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings. ___ #!BPY It tells Blender that this is a Blender script, and therefore it will consider it when scanning for scripts. link for spec rpm and src.rpm file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/spe.spec http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.noarch.rpm http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/earth-and-moon-gdm-theme-1.0.0-1.fc9.noarch.rpm ___ $ koji build --scratch dist-f10 rpmbuild/SRPMS/spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm Uploading srpm: rpmbuild/SRPMS/spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm [] 100% 00:00:28 1.16 MiB 42.02 KiB/sec Created task: 1105120 Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1105120 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 1105120 build (dist-f10, spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm): open (x86-3.fedora.phx.redhat.com) 1105121 buildArch (spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm, noarch): open (xenbuilder4.fedora.phx.redhat.com) 1105121 buildArch (spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm, noarch): open (xenbuilder4.fedora.phx.redhat.com) - closed 0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed 1105120 build (dist-f10, spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm): open (x86-3.fedora.phx.redhat.com) - closed 0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed 1105120 build (dist-f10, spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.src.rpm) completed successfully -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480727] Review Request: daemontools: is a collection of tools for managing UNIX services.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480727 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(pj.pan...@yahoo.c ||o.in) --- Comment #34 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-02-04 17:55:24 EDT --- hello any news about daemontools ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481022] Review Request: SPE - Stani's Python Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481022 --- Comment #11 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-04 18:53:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) rpmlint issue: [...] $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/spe-0.8.4.h-4.fc10.noarch.rpm spe.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter [...] #!BPY It tells Blender that this is a Blender script, and therefore it will consider it when scanning for scripts. I'd say this calls for a RFE in rpmlint. I suggest to file a bug for 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 481022] Review Request: SPE - Stani's Python Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481022 --- Comment #12 from MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-02-04 19:26:32 EDT --- soory i have write: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/earth-and-moon-gdm-theme-1.0.0-1.fc9.noarch but i would say: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/spe-0.8.4.h-4.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 484159] New: Review Request: git-cola - A highly caffeinated git gui
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: git-cola - A highly caffeinated git gui https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484159 Summary: Review Request: git-cola - A highly caffeinated git gui Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: maths...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/git-cola/git-cola.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/git-cola/git-cola-1.3.5-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: A sweet, carbonated git gui known for its sugary flavour and caffeine-inspired features. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481411] Review Request: perl-Test-Email - Test email contents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481411 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:09:15 EDT --- perl-Test-Email-0.04-1.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 474412] Review Request: giver - A simple file sharing desktop application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474412 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:10:32 EDT --- giver-0.1.8-3.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 476660] Review Request: rubygem-restr - Simple client for RESTful web services
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476660 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:08:26 EDT --- rubygem-restr-0.4.0-1.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 475897] Review Request: ncmpcpp - Clone of ncmpc with new features and written 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=475897 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:10:02 EDT --- ncmpcpp-0.2.5-4.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 457035] Review Request: libproxy - A library handling all the details of proxy configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457035 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:09:37 EDT --- libproxy-0.2.3-8.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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex 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=476440 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:11:36 EDT --- latexdiff-0.5-2.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 467376] Review Request: mingw32-pixman - MinGW Windows Pixman 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=467376 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |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 467376] Review Request: mingw32-pixman - MinGW Windows Pixman 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=467376 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:07:47 EDT --- mingw32-pixman-0.13.2-2.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 475897] Review Request: ncmpcpp - Clone of ncmpc with new features and written 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=475897 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |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 481071] Review Request: tex-musixtex - Sophisticated music typesetting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481071 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:11:16 EDT --- tex-musixtex-0.114-3.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 476660] Review Request: rubygem-restr - Simple client for RESTful web services
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476660 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |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 481411] Review Request: perl-Test-Email - Test email contents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481411 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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 481071] Review Request: tex-musixtex - Sophisticated music typesetting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481071 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 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
