[Bug 479903] Review Request: gdesklet-slideshow - Cycle through a collection of pictures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479903 Luya Tshimbalanga l...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||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 225250] Merge Review: antlr
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225250 Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ccha...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 03:35:21 EDT --- Just to clarify, have you fixed the warnings in comment #3? -- 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 485636] Review Request: cutecom - A GUI application for serial port communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485636 --- Comment #2 from Jose Luis joseluisblan...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 03:55:22 EDT --- You're right Manuel. I've changed it to desktop-file-install. I've also fixed the other issues. This is the new 0.20.0-2 revision: SPEC URL: http://babel.isa.uma.es/mrpt/src-repo/rpm/cutecom.spec SRPM URL: http://babel.isa.uma.es/mrpt/src-repo/rpm/cutecom-0.20.0-2.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 214751] Review Request: xview - XView widget libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=214751 --- Comment #22 from Christian Iseli christian.is...@licr.org 2009-02-17 04:00:35 EDT --- Still here and still haven't lost interest, and doing my best not to lose hope... -- 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 485893] New: Package Review: perl-NOCpulse-Object - NOCpulse Object abstraction for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Package Review: perl-NOCpulse-Object - NOCpulse Object abstraction for Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485893 Summary: Package Review: perl-NOCpulse-Object - NOCpulse Object abstraction for Perl Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: msu...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Blocks: 452450 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: SPEC: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/perl-NOCpulse-Object/perl-NOCpulse-Object.spec SRPM: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/perl-NOCpulse-Object/perl-NOCpulse-Object-1.26.9-1.src.rpm Description: NOCpulse provides application, network, systems and transaction monitoring, coupled with a comprehensive reporting system including availability, historical and trending reports in an easy-to-use browser interface. This package contain an abstract PERL class that tries and fails to cover up the ugliness that is OO in Perl, amongst other things. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1132668 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438608] Review Request: elisa-plugins-good - Good Plugins for the Elisa Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438608 Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #30 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-02-17 04:53:46 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: elisa-plugins-good Short Description: Good Plugins for the Elisa Media Center Owners: thias 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 253355] Review Request: twill - A simple scripting language for Web browsing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253355 Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #15 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-02-17 04:57:51 EDT --- Removing the fedora-review '?' flag that Jason set, in case that's why this package isn't getting any attention. Luke, are you still alive? I really think that the package is in good shape now, working fine, and easy to review : http://thias.fedorapeople.org/review/python-twill/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485897] New: Review Request: perl-Variable-Magic - Associate user-defined magic to variables from Perl
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-Variable-Magic - Associate user-defined magic to variables from Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485897 Summary: Review Request: perl-Variable-Magic - Associate user-defined magic to variables from Perl 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-Variable-Magic/perl-Variable-Magic.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Variable-Magic/perl-Variable-Magic-0.30-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Magic is Perl way of enhancing objects. This mechanism let the user add extra data to any variable and hook syntaxical operations (such as access, assignation or destruction) that can be applied to it. With this module, you can add your own magic to any variable without the pain of the C API. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462297] Review Request: perl-o2sms - A perl module to send SMS messages using .ie websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462297 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? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467385] Review Request: mingw32-nsiswrapper - Helper program for making NSIS Windows installers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467385 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 05:51:20 EDT --- Thanks for looking at this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467384] Review Request: mingw32-nsis - Nullsoft Scriptable Install System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467384 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 05:51:03 EDT --- Levente, thanks for looking at 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 467384] Review Request: mingw32-nsis - Nullsoft Scriptable Install System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467384 --- Comment #10 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 05:52:37 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mingw32-nsis Short Description: Nullsoft Scriptable Install System Owners: rjones berrange lfarkas Branches: F-10 EL-5 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 484933] Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and converting Microsoft Works word processor documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484933
--- Comment #13 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-17
05:52:26 EDT ---
i know there is a conflict
i would rather pack all docs in -doc as {_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
but i thought splitting will be a good compromiss, but i noticed i will
overwrite the doc-directory of the installation.
what is the right way?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467385] Review Request: mingw32-nsiswrapper - Helper program for making NSIS Windows installers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467385 --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 05:53:28 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mingw32-nsiswrapper Short Description: Helper program for making NSIS Windows installers Owners: rjones berrange Branches: F-10 EL-5 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 483620] Review Request: libbind - ISC's standard resolver 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=483620
Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-02-17 06:00:20 EDT ---
formal review is here, see the notes below:
OK source files match upstream:
05affb35022128a71d8660b6bcb0b0858a49c330 libbind-6.0b1.tar.gz
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK* compiler flags are appropriate.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
BAD rpmlint is silent.
BAD final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
OK shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK owns the directories it creates.
BAD doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK correct scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK headers in -devel
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.
- no need to manually export CFLAGS, the %configure macro takes care of that
(rpmbuild --eval %configure)
- rpmlint complains a bit
libbind-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided bind-devel
libbind.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided bind-libs
you should drop the F-7 bits and see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages
for details and/or explain your variant with respect to the guideline
libbind.x86_64: W: no-documentation
you should include CHANGES, COPYRIGHT and README as %doc
libbind.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libbind.so.4.2.0
e...@glibc_2.2.5
IMHO can be ignored
- you shouldn't own %{_includedir}/{arpa,net,sys} directories (list only the
headers) and rather make a dependency on glibc-headers
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467384] Review Request: mingw32-nsis - Nullsoft Scriptable Install System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467384 --- Comment #11 from Levente Farkas lfar...@lfarkas.org 2009-02-17 06:20:00 EDT --- my comments on the list about the script itself still apply... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462446] Review Request: ttf2pt1 - TrueType to Adobe Type 1 font converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462446 Göran Uddeborg goe...@uddeborg.se changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Göran Uddeborg goe...@uddeborg.se 2009-02-17 05:14:43 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: ttf2pt1 New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: goeran I got a request for this package to be added to EPEL, so please create the needed CVS branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484933] Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and converting Microsoft Works word processor documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484933
--- Comment #14 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-02-17
06:26:41 EDT ---
Nothing in the guidelines, so:
In %install I would fix the permissions of the installed documentation files
(chmod -x) in the buildroot, remove the INSTALL file, and use this:
%files doc
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%_docdir/%{name}-%{version}/html/
and in the main pkg:
%_docdir/%{name}-%{version}/
%exclude %_docdir/%{name}-%{version}/html/
Of course, you can distribute the files to subpkgs even further, but why? All
documentation is in the same doc rootdir, which is fine as it is.
The -doc package is just 168 KB and 1.7 MB extracted. It would not even hurt
much if you included the html tree in the -devel pkg instead. A matter of
taste.
[...]
On the contrary, your current spec file creates four different docdirs:
/usr/share/doc/libwps-0.1.2/
/usr/share/doc/libwps-devel-0.1.2/
/usr/share/doc/libwps-doc.0.1.2/
/usr/share/doc/libwps-tools-0.1.2/
with -tools and -devel only containing a single file, and with the API docs not
in -devel, but in the -doc dir.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468631] Review Request: libgarmin - C library to parse and use Garmin image 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=468631 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||485652 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485652] Review Request: navit - Car navigation system with routing engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485652 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||468631 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458952] Review Request: SEMS - an extensible SIP media server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458952 --- Comment #10 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 07:35:28 EDT --- Ver. 1.1.0 http://peter.fedorapeople.org/sems.spec http://peter.fedorapeople.org/sems-1.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Koji scratchbuild: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1132922 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462297] Review Request: perl-o2sms - A perl module to send SMS messages using .ie websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462297
--- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 07:45:13 EDT
---
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
FAIL - Sources match upstream md5sum:
could not find upstream tar.gz on given url (404 not found)
N/A - Package needs ExcludeArch
OK - 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
OK - 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:
Provides: perl(WWW::SMS::IE::aftsms) = 288 perl(WWW::SMS::IE::iesms) = 333
perl(WWW::SMS::IE::meteorsms) = 288 perl(WWW::SMS::IE::o2sms) = 288
perl(WWW::SMS::IE::vodasms) = 312
Requires: /usr/bin/perl perl(Data::Dumper) perl(File::Basename)
perl(File::Temp) perl(File::stat) perl(Getopt::Long) = 2.33 perl(POSIX)
perl(Pod::Usage) perl(Storable) perl(WWW::SMS::IE::aftsms)
perl(WWW::SMS::IE::iesms) perl(WWW::SMS::IE::meteorsms)
perl(WWW::SMS::IE::o2sms) perl(WWW::SMS::IE::vodasms) perl(constant)
perl(strict) perl(vars) perl(warnings)
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
FAIL - Should package latest version
N/A - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
TODO:
can point SOURCE0 to cpan when old relases are kept? (mandatory)
can you update to latest version? (optional)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485915] New: Review Request: mingw32-wpcap - winpcap library (user level packet capture) for MinGW
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mingw32-wpcap - winpcap library (user level packet capture) for MinGW https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485915 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-wpcap - winpcap library (user level packet capture) for MinGW Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: t.sai...@alumni.ethz.ch QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-wpcap.spec SRPM URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-wpcap-4.1.beta5-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: MinGW Windows pcap library. This is a port of libpcap to windows. pcap implements user-level network packet capture. Approved MinGW packaging guidelines are here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476234] Review Request: mindi-busybox - Busybox version suited for Mindi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476234 Bruno Cornec bruno.cor...@hp.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bruno.cor...@hp.com --- Comment #2 from Bruno Cornec bruno.cor...@hp.com 2009-02-17 08:20:46 EDT --- Sorry for that. The version is now official for upstream and available at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/10/mindi-busybox-1.7.3-1.fc10.src.rpm and the SPEC at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/10/mindi-busybox.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485417] Review Request: bochs-bios - bios implementation from the bochs project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485417 --- Comment #9 from Glauber de Oliveira Costa gco...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 08:30:04 EDT --- Ok, I have uploaded new spec and SRPM Please note that in this package, we don't see a way out of the binaries, as it does not depend only on dev86. Part of it is compiled with gcc, aiming at the target platform. As we don't have a cross compilation infrastructure, there's not too much we can do. spec: http://glommer.fedorapeople.org/bochs-bios.spec srpm: http://glommer.fedorapeople.org/bochs-bios-2.3.8-0.3.git36989b0d2.fc11.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 476536] Review Request: zapplet - Zenoss monitoring tray applet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476536 David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 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 485418] Review Request: vgabios - vga option rom for bochs/qemu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485418 --- Comment #15 from Glauber de Oliveira Costa gco...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 09:00:30 EDT --- Ok, I addressed your issues: http://glommer.fedorapeople.org/vgabios.spec http://glommer.fedorapeople.org/vgabios-0.6-0.4beta.fc11.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 226550] Merge Review: xcdroast
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226550 Roman Rakus rra...@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 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 485915] Review Request: mingw32-wpcap - winpcap library (user level packet capture) for MinGW
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485915 --- Comment #1 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 09:13:58 EDT --- At an initial brief look over the spec file, it looks to be packaged sanely. I'm super-busy this week, but if I get some time I may be able to 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 485915] Review Request: mingw32-wpcap - winpcap library (user level packet capture) for MinGW
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485915 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rjo...@redhat.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 485416] Review Request: msp430-gcc - Cross compiling GNU GCC for the MSP430
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485416 --- Comment #4 from Robert Spanton rspan...@zepler.net 2009-02-17 09:16:05 EDT --- Hi Steve, Thanks for reviewing. The packaging guidelines say: New packages will not have bugzilla entries during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the long explanation with the bug number. (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Architecture_Build_Failures) I can't create a bug against msp430-gcc until it exists in bugzilla! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226550] Merge Review: xcdroast
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226550 Roman Rakus rra...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rra...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Roman Rakus rra...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 09:25:48 EDT --- xcdroast-0.98-0.1.alpha16.fc11 built. Now it should be ok. -- 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 485416] Review Request: msp430-gcc - Cross compiling GNU GCC for the MSP430
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485416 --- Comment #5 from Steve Whitehouse swhit...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 09:25:28 EDT --- Ah, indeed :-) I think the review guidelines perhaps need updating in that case, since they say that if an arch doesn't build then it must be listed in ExcludeArch (which I see that you've done) and a bugzilla must be opened. Either way, do you think it would be possible to fix this by adding a small patch somehow? I suspect its just some missing/extra #define or something thats given us two definitions of that one thing. The messages to me don't indicate a major issue. If you think its going to be too tricky, then we can just go ahead without PPC64 for now, but it would be better to fix it if possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485007] Review Request: rhnpush - Package uploader for the RHN Satellite/Spacewalk Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485007 --- Comment #4 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 09:28:42 EDT --- But if I do it then I have 7f847b5b6066ced228e7b7868524cdcf rhnpush-0.4.2.tar.gz. So we have two problems instead one. You should package the latest version and here are different sources :) The other issues were only comments, nothing serious. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485420] Review Request: openbios - Open Source implementation of IEEE 1275-1994
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485420 --- Comment #7 from Glauber de Oliveira Costa gco...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 10:22:40 EDT --- Peter, Fcode was not required to build the pieces I'm building so far. This is the reason I have not included it. But I can happily shoot a FCode package if you really feel necessary. As for the binaries, nobody likes them. Your suggestion in vgabios was totally welcome and accepted. But in that case, dev86 was compiling everything. In this package, (as well as bochs-bios and etherboot), gcc is doing a big part of the job. By purely gcc suckiness, we can't easily generate code for alternate platforms other than native. So I'm afraid we do have to build once, and then pack binaries in the way we did for etherboot. Please take a look at that package review for more information. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459444] Review Request: ctdb - Clustered TDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459444 Jeremy Katz ka...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ka...@redhat.com --- Comment #23 from Jeremy Katz ka...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 10:33:38 EDT --- Okay, picking up the review, there are still some things that aren't quite right here There are two that are definitely blockers * What is the canonical upstream location? The repo mentioned on http://ctdb.samba.org/download.html doesn't have the version being packaged or the included COPYING file. * In the %postun, you should be doing condrestart, not restart -- otherwise, an upgrade will end up always starting ctdb for people. These are smaller things, but really should be fixed also * If your source is really just a git archive, please follow the guidelines for those (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control) as opposed to a one-off directory which isn't keeping old versions of the tarballs * Rather than copying docs into docdir directly, you can just list them with %doc COPYING %doc doc/ctdb or similar in the %files section -- note that these paths are then relative to the source dir * There still needs to be a comment for the patches * Why is /etc/ctdb/statd-callout in /etc? General purpose scripts generally shouldn't be in /etc * Is the build process not safe for make -j? And the final thing, who is actually intending to own this package now and is a sponsor still needed? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #30 from William Cohen wco...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 10:44:16 EDT
---
I built the package locally on F-10 and F-11. I looked through the output of
the build and saw a number of messages about generic types should be
parameterized and Discouraged access like the following examples:
[javac] --
[javac] 1. WARNING in
/home/wcohen/rh-rpms/BUILD/eclipse-systemtapgui-1.0/bu
ild/plugins/com.ibm.systemtapgui.generic.editor/src/com/ibm/systemtapgui/generic
/editor/ColorManager.java (at line 29)
[javac] Iterator e = fColorTable.values().iterator();
[javac]
[javac] Iterator is a raw type. References to generic type IteratorE
shoul
d be parameterized
[javac] --
[javac] 13. WARNING in
/home/wcohen/rh-rpms/BUILD/eclipse-systemtapgui-1.0/b
uild/plugins/com.ibm.systemtapgui.generic.consolelog/src/com/ibm/systemtapgui/ge
neric/consolelog/actions/ConsoleAction.java (at line 77)
[javac] private boolean isRunning(ConsoleView cv) {
[javac]^^^
[javac] Discouraged access: The type ConsoleView is not accessible due to
re
striction on classpath entry
/home/wcohen/rh-rpms/BUILD/eclipse-systemtapgui-1.0
/build/SDK/plugins/org.eclipse.ui.console_3.3.0.v20080529-1300.jar
Are these warnings something that should be cleaned up? Or can they be safely
ignored?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485007] Review Request: rhnpush - Package uploader for the RHN Satellite/Spacewalk Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485007 --- Comment #5 from Michael Stahnke mastah...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 10:48:35 EDT --- If I am reading this correctly, I should package the released Tarball and not the generated tarball from Git. Is that correct? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485941] New: Review Request: eclipse-valgrind - Eclipse Valgrind Integration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-valgrind - Eclipse Valgrind Integration https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485941 Summary: Review Request: eclipse-valgrind - Eclipse Valgrind Integration Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: eba...@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://ebaron.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-valgrind/eclipse-valgrind.spec SRPM URL: http://ebaron.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-valgrind/eclipse-valgrind-0.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Eclipse plugins to integrate the Valgrind tool suite into the workbench. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485416] Review Request: msp430-gcc - Cross compiling GNU GCC for the MSP430
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485416
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rc040...@freenet.de
--- Comment #6 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de 2009-02-17 11:10:32
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Created an attachment (id=331830)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=331830) [details]
koji ppc64 build.log ending in failure.
As documented in specfile, build fails in koji for ppc64. I attach the
build.log for this failure.
This build fails, because you are not correctly passing CFLAGS to configure.
You need to override CC in configure
CC=%{__cc} ${RPM_OPT_FLAGS} ./configure
Then it builds: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1133315
Other issues:
* MUSTFIX: Your package must own %{_libdir}/gcc-lib
* CONSIDER: The libexecdir warnings you observe, originate from this antiquated
GCC not to install anything to below %_libexecdir.
(Newer gcc's install internal binaries to %_libexecdir/gcc/target/version,
ancient GCCs install them to %{_libdir}/gcc-lib/target/version and mix them
up with target binaries)
= the whole debug_info/brp-strip hacks are non-functional in this case.
You have 2 alternatives to address this:
a) Fix the sed call to hack up brp-strip in such a way it only picks up the
host-executables
b) Remove all the hack entirely and live with the warnings brp-strip issues
However, you seem to be lucky, this seems possible in this case, because
brp-strip etc. (at least on Fedora 10) are broken enough not to try corrupting
your target's files.
* CONSIDER: I would change your %prep/%setup into
%prep
%setup -q -T -c
%setup -q -T -D -a0
%setup -q -T -D -a1
(But that's just my personal preference.)
* CONSIDER: Instead of removing the *.1's you could rename them into
%{target}-*.1
(A bug having been fixed in upstream GCCs for several years).
Finally, I guess you know that gcc-3.2.3 is dead and discontinued for ca.
5 years - Not actually something I would want to maintain ;-)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485416] Review Request: msp430-gcc - Cross compiling GNU GCC for the MSP430
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485416 --- Comment #7 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de 2009-02-17 11:12:41 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=332240) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=332240) Diff against *.spec to address the issues mentioned previous comment -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 11:24:04 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-linux-procfs Short Description: Abstractions to extract information from the Linux kernel /proc files. Owners: acme Branches: F11 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 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 #31 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 11:32:08 EDT --- Sure, they should be cleaned up, but that's an upstream thing IMO :) Yes, they can be safely ignored in the meantime. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485607] Review Request: SciTools - A Python library for scientific computing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485607
--- Comment #23 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-02-17 11:36:41
EDT ---
- You can correct the warning about the spec file by adding a %build section.
- extras: matplotlib is ok, but dx-devel should probably be dx.
- You must add BuildArch: noarch to the spec file to correct the no binary
error. (There's nothing architecture specific in the package, so it's enough to
build it once, you don't need separate i386, x86_64 etc packages).
José: please correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the non-executable script
errors and spurious file perms warnings in files under
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/ don't cause any action.
The doc file dependency warnings show, that maybe it's wiser after all to put
the examples in /usr/share/%{name}-%{version}/examples. Remember to add a note
about the examples to the package readme.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476404] Review Request: bullet - 3D Collision Detection and Rigid Body Dynamics 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=476404 --- Comment #22 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-17 11:37:33 EDT --- For 2.73-3: * License - Now the license tag for this package should be zlib and MIT and BSD. * All codes under Demos/ Extras/ Glut/ are now removed. * Also all files under mk/ are not used. * Source0 - By the way the tarball included in your srpm differs from what I could download from the URL written in the spec file. If you created the tarball by yourself, please write some comments in the spec file how you created the tarball. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code * Redundant BuildRequires - BuildRequires: gcc-c++ is redundant on Fedora. ref: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 * Compiler flags - On Fedora the default optimation level is -O2 (you can check this by $ rpm --eval %optflags). However currently this software uses -O3. 96 [ 0%] [ 2%] [ 2%] [ 3%] Building CXX object src/LinearMath/CMakeFiles/LinearMath.dir/btAlignedAllocator.o 97 Building CXX object src/LinearMath/CMakeFiles/LinearMath.dir/btQuickprof.o 98 cd /builddir/build/BUILD/bullet-2.73/src/LinearMath /usr/bin/c++ -DLinearMath_EXPORTS -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -O3 -DNDEBUG -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -I/builddir/build/BUILD/bullet-2.73/src -I/builddir/build/BUILD/bullet-2.73/src/LinearMath/} -o CMakeFiles/LinearMath.dir/btAlignedAllocator.o -c /builddir/build/BUILD/bullet-2.73/src/LinearMath/btAlignedAllocator.cpp If you don't have some reason you prefer to use -O3 optimization level, please remove this. * ldconfig symlinks ]# ls -al /usr/lib/libBulletCollision* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 2009-02-18 00:56 /usr/lib/libBulletCollision.so - libBulletCollision.so.2.73 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 706252 2009-02-17 00:34 /usr/lib/libBulletCollision.so.2.73 - Usually in this case the (soft) symlink named libBulletCollision.so.2 which points to libBulletCollision.so.2.73 should also be provided and the symlink (libBulletCollision.so.2) should be included in bullet package (see libjpeg and libjpeg-devel rpms for example) * Directory ownership issue - For example: $ LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/include/LinearMath/btList.h bullet-devel-2.73-3.fc11.i386 $ LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/include/LinearMath/ file /usr/include/LinearMath is not owned by any package Here -devel subpackage installs btList.h under %_includedir/Linearmath, however the directory %_includedir/Linearmath itself is not owned by any packages, which must be owned by bullet-devel. ref: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories * Duplicate documents - There is no need to include the same document files into both main package and -devel subpackage. * Misc rpmlint issue bullet.src:77: W: macro-in-%changelog post bullet.src:78: W: macro-in-%changelog description bullet.src:79: W: macro-in-%changelog summary bullet.src:80: W: macro-in-%changelog group bullet.src:82: W: macro-in-%changelog description bullet.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/bullet-2.73/ChangeLog bullet-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bullet-2.73/src/LinearMath/btPoolAllocator.h bullet-debuginfo.i386: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/bullet-2.73/src/LinearMath/btPoolAllocator.h bullet-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bullet-2.73/src/BulletDynamics/ConstraintSolver/btSliderConstraint.cpp bullet-debuginfo.i386: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/bullet-2.73/src/BulletDynamics/ConstraintSolver/btSliderConstraint.cpp bullet-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bullet-2.73/src/BulletDynamics/ConstraintSolver/btSliderConstraint.h bullet-debuginfo.i386: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/bullet-2.73/src/BulletDynamics/ConstraintSolver/btSliderConstraint.h bullet-devel.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/bullet-devel-2.73/ChangeLog --- - In
[Bug 478470] Review Request: mrpt - The Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit (MRPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478470 --- Comment #27 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-17 11:44:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #26) If your final opinion is to leave all programs in mrpt-apps, I would see that fine. In that case, I might also join mrpt-example-datasets back into mrpt-apps as it was in the beginning. I think this idea (i.e. putting all programs in mrpt-apps) is much better. Some comments - For tarball based on svn repository, I prefer to include revision number rather than the date you checked the source because revision number identifies the codes used in the srpm, however this is left to your choice. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225250] Merge Review: antlr
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225250 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-02-17 11:52:30 EDT --- I have not. I was simply offering to, to speed up the process. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #9 from William Cohen wco...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 11:59:14 EDT
---
The packaging for systemtapguiserver is looking okay to me. A couple minor
changes:
- instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT use %{buildroot}
-Maybe make the %description more like to describe what this package is:
Server for Eclipse SystemTap GUI plugin. This eclipse plugin assists
writing SystemTap scripts and viewing kernel performance.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461484] Review Request: twin - Textmode window environment 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=461484 --- Comment #8 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-02-17 12:03:20 EDT --- OK, finally there is a new upstream release solving the licensing issues: New SPEC file: http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/twin/twin.spec New SRPM: http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/twin/twin-0.6.1-1.fc10.src.rpm I've also tested that it builds with gcc 4.4, see the koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1133535 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485954] New: Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 Summary: Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: do...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description = Marlin aims to be a fully featured and powerful sample editor for the GNOME2 platform. spec file: http://people.redhat.com/dseketel/rpms/marlin/marlin.spec-1 srpm: http://people.redhat.com/dseketel/rpms/marlin/marlin-0.13-1.fc10.src.rpm You can check the Koji build logs for F-10 and F-11 at: Koji task for F-10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1133396 Koji task for F-11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1133563 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483020] Review Request: torch - Torch is a simple machine-learning 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=483020 Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 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 483025] Review Request: imms - Adaptive playlist framework tracking and adapting to your listening patterns
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483025 Bug 483025 depends on bug 483020, which changed state. Bug 483020 Summary: Review Request: torch - Torch is a simple machine-learning library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483020 What|Old Value |New Value 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 485621] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed - Interface to the Mozilla embedding widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485621 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||485961 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485961] Review Request: gmusicbrowser - Jukebox for large collections of music 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=485961 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||squen...@free.fr Depends on||485621 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485961] New: Review Request: gmusicbrowser - Jukebox for large collections of music files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: gmusicbrowser - Jukebox for large collections of music
files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485961
Summary: Review Request: gmusicbrowser - Jukebox for large
collections of music files
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: fed...@famillecollet.com
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/gmusicbrowser.spec
SRPM URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/gmusicbrowser-1.0.1-1.fc8.src.rpm
Mock Log: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/gmusicbrowser-build.log
Koji Scratch Build : http://remi.fedorapeople.org/gmusicbrowser-build.log
Description:
Jukebox for large collections of music files
Uses gstreamer, mpg321/ogg123/flac123 or mplayer for playback
Main features :
- customizable window layouts
- artist/album lock : easily restrict playlist to current artist/album
- easy access to related songs (same artist/album/title)
- simple mass-tagging and mass-renaming
- support multiple genres for each song
- customizable labels can be set for each song
- filters with unlimited nesting of conditions
- customizable weighted random mode
--
rpmlint output :
gmusicbrowser.src: I: checking
gmusicbrowser.src:59: E: hardcoded-library-path in
%{_prefix}/lib/menu/gmusicbrowser
gmusicbrowser.noarch: I: checking
gmusicbrowser.spec:60: E: hardcoded-library-path in
%{_prefix}/lib/menu/gmusicbrowser
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
= menu not packaged.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485963] New: Review Request: perl-MooseX-GlobRef-Object - Store a Moose object in glob reference
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-MooseX-GlobRef-Object - Store a Moose object in glob reference https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485963 Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-GlobRef-Object - Store a Moose object in glob reference 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-MooseX-GlobRef-Object/perl-MooseX-GlobRef-Object.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-MooseX-GlobRef-Object/perl-MooseX-GlobRef-Object-0.04-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This meta-policy allows to store Moose object in glob reference or file handle. The class attributes will be stored in anonymous hash associated with glob reference. It allows to create a Moose version of IO::Handle. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485961] Review Request: gmusicbrowser - Jukebox for large collections of music 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=485961 --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-02-17 13:04:26 EDT --- Typo, the Koji scratch build is : https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1133672 And remember that it requires perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485621 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485967] New: Review Request: perl-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch - Logging Role for Moose
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-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch - Logging Role for Moose https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485967 Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch - Logging Role for Moose 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-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch/perl-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch/perl-MooseX-LazyLogDispatch-0.02-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Log::Dispatch role for use with your Moose classes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485607] Review Request: SciTools - A Python library for scientific computing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485607 --- Comment #24 from Joseph Smidt jsm...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-17 13:48:08 EDT --- I have made the above changes so far except moving the examples since I wanted to ask: Is this really necessary. I know rpmlint is complaining, but end users will want to look to the documentation to see examples. I know whenever I want examples I look to the documentation. But if it is needed, I will change 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 485973] New: Review Request: maxr - A classic turn-based strategy game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: maxr - A classic turn-based strategy game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485973 Summary: Review Request: maxr - A classic turn-based strategy game Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cheekybo...@foresightlinux.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cheekyboinc.spielen-unter-linux.de/maxr.spec SRPM URL: http://cheekyboinc.spielen-unter-linux.de/maxr-0.2.4-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: M.A.X.R. (Mechanized Assault and eXploration Reloaded) is a fanmade strategy game by the community of maxr.org. MAXR is OpenSource and a remake of the old M.A.X.by Interplay from 1996 featuring network games based on TCP/IP (e.g. over the internet). The game can be played in a turn-based mode (with or without time limit), or simultaneous mode (all the players take their turns at the same time), and features combat in air, land, and sea. Three resources are present on the maps - Raw Materials, which are needed to manufacture units, structures and ammunition, Fuel, which power generators need to function, and Gold, which is used to purchase upgrades. This game is a mix of realtime and turnbased strategy with battle chess character. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483116] Review Request: grnotify - Google Reader Notifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483116 --- Comment #8 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 13:58:52 EDT --- Hi, gnome-icon-theme is an error of my part. I have proposed to the author a new setup.py for a easiers packaging : https://sourceforge.net/tracker2/?func=detailaid=2609868group_id=217132atid=1039328 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538 --- Comment #25 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 14:12:05 EDT --- http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/iptux/iptux-0.4.5-0.2.rc1.fc11.src.rpm I have integrated the ppc patch into new SRPMS. Later, I will contact with the author and persuade him to apply patches in the upstream. Now he is working for new functions. If new version is released, the patch would have been applied in the upstream. You said that srpm does not build on f10-updates-candidate due to bug in GConf2-devel. That means iptux source codes do not cause the failure. Is that right? Also, I want to submit a new software. But I do not understand something. So I will send a mail to you and ask you several questions? Is it OK? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485542] Review Request: breip-font - The Breip handwriting-style cursive font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485542 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(scart...@learn.se ||necac.on.ca) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(scart...@learn.se ||necac.on.ca) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-fonts-bugs-l...@redh ||at.com --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-17 14:23:48 EDT --- Add the font bug list in CC so we don't miss issue updates again -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291 Paul Wouters p...@xelerance.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|NotReady| --- Comment #11 from Paul Wouters p...@xelerance.com 2009-02-17 14:28:27 EDT --- I confirmed the package still works for me on x86_64. rpmlint is still fairly quiet: uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755 uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Thanks for your work Christian! Let's hope we can get this into Fedora soon! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480279] Package Review for gnome-globalmenu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480279 Arkady L. Shane tigro.ma...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tigro.ma...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Arkady L. Shane tigro.ma...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 14:47:35 EDT --- Hello! I have built package (ftp://mirror.yandex.ru/fedora/russianfedora/russianfedora/free/fedora/updates/10/SRPMS/gnome-globalmenu-0.7.3-3.fc10.src.rpm) for Fedora 10. It passes rpmlint tests for spec and binaries. You can take it. And this 0.7.3 version does not compiles on fedora 9: gcc -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -g -o .libs/GlobalMenu.PanelApplet GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-applet.o GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-main.o GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-gtkextra-gconfdialog.o GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-switcher.o GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-template.o GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-gnomemenuhelper.o GlobalMenu_PanelApplet-task-utils-c.o -pthread -L/lib -lpanel-applet-2 -lgnomeui-2 -lSM -lICE -lbonoboui-2 -lgnomevfs-2 -lgconf-2 -lgnomecanvas-2 -lgnome-2 -lpopt -lart_lgpl_2 -lbonobo-2 -lbonobo-activation -lORBit-2 -lgthread-2.0 -lrt -lnotify -ldbus-glib-1 -ldbus-1 -lgnome-menu ../libgnomenu/.libs/libgnomenu.so -lwnck-1 -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -latk-1.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lpangocairo-1.0 -lpango-1.0 -lcairo -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lglib-2.0 ../libgnomenu/.libs/libgnomenu.so: undefined reference to `g_markup_parse_context_pop' ../libgnomenu/.libs/libgnomenu.so: undefined reference to `g_markup_parse_context_push' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-17 14:48:55 EDT --- Ok, my bad for not being crystal-clear. is one of the few reserved characters in XML, you can't use it as-is. I'd say replace it with #38; http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-predefined-ent Also, while I'm at it 1. next week the new koji will allow srpm building with rawhide rpm, and rawhide rpm has support for group inheritance, so you can drop all the Group: User Interface/X from subpackages 2. for some reason upstream decided is was smart to add GPLGNU to the font names this release. So for interoperability reasons with other distros and documents that use the old font names, it's better to use the substitution template to alias the old names /usr/share/fontconfig/templates/substitution-font-template.conf (at least for the fonts in the old pack at http://groups.google.com/group/bpg-fonts/web/Old_BPG_GPL_GNU_Fonts.zip ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #9 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 15:01:24 EDT --- 1. Well, that's nice, but I'll be building these fonts for older releases as well, so I'll keep them. It doesn't hurt. 2. Okay, fixed, along with the #38 replacement across the board. New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/bpg-fonts-20090205-3.fc11.src.rpm New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/bpg-fonts.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485993] New: Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Diff - Diff module versions from the CPANPLUS shell
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-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Diff - Diff module versions from the CPANPLUS shell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485993 Summary: Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Diff - Diff module versions from the CPANPLUS shell Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plu gins-Diff/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Diff.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Diff-0.01-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: This plugin allows you to diff 2 versions of modules from within the CPANPLUS shell and see what code changes have taken place. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1133957 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485853] Review Request: calendar - Reminder utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485853 --- Comment #1 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 15:37:14 EDT --- Correction on SRPM URL: http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/calendar-1.25-1.fc11.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 486000] New: Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Changes - View a module's Changes file from the CPANPLUS shell
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-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Changes - View a module's Changes file from the CPANPLUS shell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486000 Summary: Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Changes - View a module's Changes file from the CPANPLUS shell Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plu gins-Changes OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Changes.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-Changes-0.02-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This plugin allows you to display the Changes (or Changelog, ChangeLog, etc) file of a module to get an overview of what (according to the maintainer) has changed. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1134038 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291 --- Comment #12 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-02-17 15:50:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) I confirmed the package still works for me on x86_64. rpmlint is still fairly quiet: uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755 uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Thanks for your work Christian! Let's hope we can get this into Fedora soon! uml_net requires suid bit to work , so there erros can be ignored. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485607] Review Request: SciTools - A Python library for scientific computing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485607 --- Comment #25 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-02-17 15:54:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) I have made the above changes so far except moving the examples since I wanted to ask: Is this really necessary. I know rpmlint is complaining, but end users will want to look to the documentation to see examples. I know whenever I want examples I look to the documentation. But if it is needed, I will change it. For me it's okay if the examples stay in %doc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485853] Review Request: calendar - Reminder utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485853 Warren Togami wtog...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wtog...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Warren Togami wtog...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 16:02:22 EDT --- calendar.src: W: strange-permission export-calendar-source.sh 0775 export-calendar-source.sh to verify the source goes boom. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461484] Review Request: twin - Textmode window environment 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=461484
--- Comment #9 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-02-17 16:12:08
EDT ---
...just forgot to mention that I've also created and packaged a LICENSING.INFO
file which recapitulates the state of licensing, there are finally 5 licenses
in use:(
MIT: admin/install-sh
Public domain: admin/mkinstalldirs
clients/{cat.c,clip.c,clutter.c,demo.c,demo2.c,demo3.c,findtwin.c,lsobj.c,restackM.c,restackW.c,sendmsg.c,sysmon.c}
include/md5.h,server/{md5.c,wrapper.c}
BSD with advertising: include/my_ttydefaults.h
LGPLv2+: lib/*
GPLv2+: others
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486009] New: Review Request: php-pear-Crypt_Blowfish - quick two-way blowfish encryption
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Crypt_Blowfish - quick two-way blowfish encryption https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486009 Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Crypt_Blowfish - quick two-way blowfish encryption Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: xav...@bachelot.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/php-pear-Crypt_Blowfish.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/php-pear-Crypt_Blowfish-1.1.0-0.1.rc2.fc10.src.rpm Description: This package allows you to perform two-way blowfish encryption on the fly using only PHP. This package does not require the MCrypt PHP extension to work, although it can make use of it if available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486010] New: Review Request: mrbs - Meeting Room Booking System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mrbs - Meeting Room Booking System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486010 Summary: Review Request: mrbs - Meeting Room Booking System Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: xav...@bachelot.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/mrbs.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/mrbs-1.4-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: he Meeting Room Booking System (MRBS) is a PHP-based application for booking meeting rooms. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486010] Review Request: mrbs - Meeting Room Booking System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486010 Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||486009 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486009] Review Request: php-pear-Crypt_Blowfish - quick two-way blowfish encryption
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486009 Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||486010 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485853] Review Request: calendar - Reminder utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485853 --- Comment #3 from Warren Togami wtog...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 16:20:12 EDT --- - RPM spec looks fine. - export-calendar-source.sh fails for me, but manual comparison passes. - My only concern is calendar might be too generic of a name. Are you sure nothing else that could possibly be added to the distro has this name? I approve this package if you ask fedora-devel-list for opinions and nobody objects within 24 hours of that posting. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486016] New: Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-RT - Check for rt.cpan.org tickets from within the CPANPLUS shell
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-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-RT - Check for rt.cpan.org tickets from within the CPANPLUS shell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486016 Summary: Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-RT - Check for rt.cpan.org tickets from within the CPANPLUS shell Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plu gins-RT OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-RT.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-CPANPLUS-Shell-Default-Plugins-RT-0.01-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This plugin allows you to query rt.cpan.org tickets for a given distribution within the CPANPLUS shell. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1134149 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461484] Review Request: twin - Textmode window environment 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=461484 --- Comment #10 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 16:44:37 EDT --- Normally, the BSD with advertising file would be a problem, but the Copyright holder on that file is The Regents of the University of California, and they issued a blanket statement years ago dropping that clause. ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change You should tell upstream about this, and have them drop the advertising clause in their copy of that code. You also need to correct the License tag to drop the advertising clause. Aside from that issue, it looks okay. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485853] Review Request: calendar - Reminder utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485853 --- Comment #4 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 16:48:20 EDT --- Latest spec and source RPM: http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/calendar.spec http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/calendar-1.25-3.fc11.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 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 #10 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-17 17:11:05 EDT --- missing the trailing ;, an SGML/XML entity has the something; format -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #11 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 17:16:36 EDT --- Argh. Fixed. New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/bpg-fonts-20090205-4.fc11.src.rpm New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/bpg-fonts.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459444] Review Request: ctdb - Clustered TDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459444
--- Comment #24 from Sumit Bose sb...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 17:24:13 EDT ---
Thank you for the review.
I have addressed:
- upstream location/source from git archive issue by adding a description about
how to create the tar file from the git repo as describes in the guidelines
- changed restart to condrestart
- added comments to the patches
- use make %{_smp_mflags}
I have not
- changed the copying of docs, because the makefile already creates a docdir
with some files and this seems to conflict with using %doc in the %files
section
- moved statd-callout, because I think that people who are currently using the
upstream version are used to the /etc location, but I will talk to the upstream
maintainer about moving it.
The new version can be found under
http://sbose.fedorapeople.org/ctdb-1.0.71-5.fc10.src.rpm
If adas does not mind I can take the ownership for this package, but I would
need a sponsor.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tcall...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-17 17:40:50 EDT --- Very fine work on a non-trivial package. I don't see any obvious problem now. ♖♖♖ 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 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 #13 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-17 17:42:07 EDT --- You can now continue from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a as usual -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485418] Review Request: vgabios - vga option rom for bochs/qemu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485418 Glauber de Oliveira Costa gco...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||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 479903] Review Request: gdesklet-slideshow - Cycle through a collection of pictures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479903 --- Comment #35 from MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 18:23:52 EDT --- sorry for the waiting. the package is ready. i wait the cvs 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 364891] Review Request: icecream - distributed compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364891 Michal Schmidt mschm...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Michal Schmidt mschm...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 18:31:28 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: icecream New Branches: EL-5 Owners: michich -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226299] Merge Review: pkgconfig
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226299 Bug 226299 depends on bug 224148, which changed state. Bug 224148 Summary: pkgconfig: Requires.private creates unnecessary depencencies https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224148 What|Old Value |New Value Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED 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 483403] Review Request: A collection of quotes in French for gdesklets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483403 MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?, 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 483403] Review Request: A collection of quotes in French for gdesklets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483403 MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-02-17 18:41:06 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gdesklet-citation Short Description: A collection of quotes in French for gdesklets Owners: bioinfornat...@gmail.com Branches: F9 F10 InitialCC: bioinfornatics -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #9 from Hubert Plociniczak hub...@lshift.net 2009-02-17 18:51:13 EDT --- There is an upcoming minor release 1.5.2 which will also include changes to the rpm packaging that you mentioned. This should be really soon. Sorry for the delay! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485853] Review Request: calendar - Reminder utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485853 --- Comment #5 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 18:53:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) calendar.src: W: strange-permission export-calendar-source.sh 0775 export-calendar-source.sh to verify the source goes boom. rpmlint seems to just dislike executable scripts in source RPM files. I've changed this to 0644. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485853] Review Request: calendar - Reminder utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485853 --- Comment #6 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2009-02-17 18:54:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) - export-calendar-source.sh fails for me, but manual comparison passes. I've changed export-calendar-source.sh to use 'cvs status' to get the revision number of calendar.c. That seemed to be failing on your system, but working on mine, - My only concern is calendar might be too generic of a name. Are you sure nothing else that could possibly be added to the distro has this name? I approve this package if you ask fedora-devel-list for opinions and nobody objects within 24 hours of that posting. I will send a message to fedora-devel-list asking for comments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #10 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-17
19:03:03 EDT ---
William, if you'll take the time to read carefully
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS,
you will certainly notice that there is no reason to replace $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
with %{buildroot} or viceversa. The only rule is to not mix them in the same
spec.
And to be honest, the %description from the spec looks more clear to me than
the version suggested in comment #9. I especially like this part: This package
installs the server side of systemtapgui. Part which should end with a dot
(hint, hint!).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483403] Review Request: A collection of quotes in French for gdesklets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483403 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs?, fedora-review+ | --- Comment #9 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-17 19:25:41 EDT --- I see no formal review being done for this package, I am resetting the flags. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
