[Bug 465858] Package Review: afpfs-ng - Apple Filing Protocol client

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465858


Lubomir Rintel  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Comment #15 from Lubomir Rintel   2009-03-25 02:49:22 EDT 
---
Thank you all.
Imported and built.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 454959] Review Request: eclipse-cusp - Eclipse Common Lisp Development Tools (Cusp) plugin

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454959





--- Comment #12 from Andrew Overholt   2009-03-25 02:46:04 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Was someone going to post a buildable package?  

Not me.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456190





--- Comment #53 from Derek Atkins   2009-03-25 02:40:39 EDT ---
Lubomir,

I read the thread.  My take on it was exactly what you said, "it just doesn't
grant the user the freedom to modify the program to suit his needs."   My take
as a user of the program is that I'd much rather see the package in the
distribution.  I just don't care about the freedos portion, as honestly that's
not the part that I would feel I need to modify to "suit my needs."  And even
so, the code is there if I want to see it, even if I can't compile it.

If debian is willing to ship it as-is Fedora should most certainly be willing
to.

While I agree that long-term it would be BETTER to get the code compiling using
the Fedora build tools, I think it would behoove users to have access to the
program as-is sooner, rather that block distribution waiting on this.

To quote many people from the IETF:  The Perfect is the enemy of The Good.

Just my $0.02.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456190





--- Comment #52 from Lubomir Rintel   2009-03-25 02:28:18 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #50)
> (In reply to comment #49)
> > Bad news :(
> > 
> > Seems like FreeDOS can be built with Watcom C and Borland C Compiler only, 
> > both
> > of which are non-free. Building with dev86's bcc is most likely not possible
> > now.
> > 
> > Do you think DOSEmu package would actually be usable without the FreeDOS 
> > image
> > shipped?

Is it?

> I have followed up on this, it seems building with free tools is possible, but
> not now, and maybe not ever.  Its a dam shame, does this mean its finished
> here?
> 
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=op.ura4quaez9dfrf%40isor&forum_name=freedos-devel
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=ef6ac8350903231451p2e1e7091n3eebd87a34c456d5%40mail.gmail.com&forum_name=freedos-devel

That's pretty bad. On packaging list it was suggested [2] that you join forces
with Debian, which also ships pre-built binary, and try to convince them to
switch to dev86's bcc. It brings an advantage of being distributed with quite
popular Linux distribution.

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-March/msg00065.html

(In reply to comment #51)
> Just because we cannot build freedos shouldn't imply we cannot distribute it. 
> We /DO/ have the source code, and we can certainly distribute the source code
> (along with the pre-built binary).  That's certainly legal as far as the GPL 
> is
> concerned, even if we can't reliably reproduce the binary using our compiler 
> of
> choice.  

Derek we're not saying it's illegal. It just doesn't grant the user the freedom
to modify the program to suit his needs. See the thread on packaging list for
discussion on this [1]:

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-March/msg00056.html

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491820] Review Request: ibus-sayura - The Sinhala IME engine for IBus

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491820


Parag AN(पराग)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review?
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-03-25 02:06:52 
EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i586).
koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257587
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPM.
+ source files match upstream.
e426c362f97ddc0647dc732f684e86d9  ibus-sayura-1.0.0.20090324.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc files present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code.
+ no static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage exists.
+ no .la files.
+ translations are available.
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ no scriptlets are used.

Suggestions:
1) remove following line from SPEC
rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitearch}/_sayura.la

2) change following line to keep timestamps 
make DESTDIR=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} install
to
make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p"

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 491875] Review Request: unzoo - ZOO archive extractor

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491875





--- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-03-25 
01:33:48 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> - optflags are not used. Use
> gcc %{optflags} -o unzoo -DSYS_IS_UNIX -O unzoo.c
> in the build phase.

One comment:
"-O" overwrites "-O2" optimization level used in %optflags,
so when using %optflags "-O" argument should be removed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491821] Review Request: hyphen-hsb - Upper Sorbian hyphenation rules

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491821


Parag AN(पराग)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-03-25 00:32:42 
EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i586).
koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257572
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
72dee9bee45d94b0e73d5e1a0c06a27c  hyph-hsb.tex
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.

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 492039] Review Request: perl-Jemplate - JavaScript Templating with Template Toolkit

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492039


Parag AN(पराग)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-03-25 00:31:31 
EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i586).
koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257482
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
208799c450df16134949ee031b92eef4  Jemplate-0.23.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ make test gave
All tests successful.
Files=20, Tests=140, 22 wallclock secs ( 0.12 usr  0.02 sys +  9.59 cusr  0.71
csys = 10.44 CPU)
+ Package perl-Jemplate-0.23-1.fc11.noarch =>
Provides: perl(Jemplate) = 0.23 perl(Jemplate::Directive)
perl(Jemplate::Grammar) = 2.10 perl(Jemplate::Parser) perl(Jemplate::Runtime)
perl(Jemplate::Runtime::Compact)
Requires: /usr/bin/perl perl >= 0:5.004 perl >= 0:5.006001 perl(Getopt::Long)
perl(Jemplate) >= 0.22 perl(Jemplate::Directive) perl(Jemplate::Grammar)
perl(Jemplate::Parser) perl(Template) >= 2.14 perl(base) perl(lib) perl(strict)
perl(vars) perl(warnings)

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 491892] Review Request: openscap - Set of open source libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491892





--- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग)   2009-03-25 00:07:07 
EDT ---
Peter you should read
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 492039] Review Request: perl-Jemplate - JavaScript Templating with Template Toolkit

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492039


Parag AN(पराग)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||panem...@gmail.com
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.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 475852] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep Base library package

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475852





--- Comment #19 from Michel Alexandre Salim   
2009-03-24 23:45:20 EDT ---
I have just rebuilt gnustep-make (see linked bug information); Jochen, if you
add the missing dependency, post the updated SRPM, and do a Koji scratch build
for Rawhide, I'll do the full review.

Charles, is that with 2.0.6 or 2.0.8? 2.0.8 should be in Rawhide soon; to get
it earlier (or for F-10), see the last comment in

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488534

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 468227] Review Request: python-repoze-who - An identification and authentication framework for WSGI

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468227





--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 23:42:07 EDT 
---
Is this package still needed?  I notice that the two packages it blocked have
been closed for various reasons.

If so, did you want to update to 1.0.10?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 462580] Review Request: wstx - Woodstox Stax Implementation

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462580


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||needinfo?(guth...@counterex
   ||ample.org)




--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 22:44:07 EDT 
---
It's been a long time since the previous comment with no response; I'll close
this soon if nothing happens.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 462560] Review Request: xmlpull-api - XmlPull v1 API is a simple to use XML pull parsing API

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462560





--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 22:38:23 EDT 
---
FYI, the first and third rpmlint issues above aren't something we care about. 
As for the second, you should generally not use "Epoch: 0" in a Fedora package.
 And to address the question in comment #1, the answer depends on whether
upstream believes that version 1.1.4b actually exists.  Some upstreams do tag
releases but don't worry about generating tarballs; other upstreams might make
a tag but wouldn't want to get bug reports for a version they didn't release. 
So you need to ask them.

Some other comments:

Please remove the commented cruft from the specfile.  (Well, you can't remove
the horrible license block from the top, of course, but you can remove the
other stuff that just clutters 

If you are going to use to use all of those macro forms (%{__cp} and such), you
need to use them consistently.  Which means bare "ln" and "mv" should not be
used.  The spec file looks much cleaner if you just don't use them, but that's
up to you.

Why move the pre-build jars to "jar.no" instead of just deleting them?  You can
delete them all with a single find command, so your %prep section could just be
two lines.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 462342] Review Request: crimson - Java XML parser

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462342





--- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 22:22:49 EDT 
---
So, six months later, what should happen here?  Is there any need for this
package?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 458952] Review Request: SEMS - an extensible SIP media server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly 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


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co
   ||m)




--- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 22:18:40 
EDT ---
It's been over a month with no response.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 452486] Review Request: stage - 2D multiple-robot simulator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452486





--- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 22:10:01 EDT 
---
It's been over six months now; was there ever an updated package, or should
this ticket just be closed?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 454959] Review Request: eclipse-cusp - Eclipse Common Lisp Development Tools (Cusp) plugin

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454959





--- Comment #11 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 22:06:54 
EDT ---
Was someone going to post a buildable package?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 458826] Review Request: s390utils - Linux/390 specific utilities

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458826





--- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 21:51:56 EDT 
---
A few additional comments:

Is there really no download location for the three tarballs?  If there's any
way to get them, you need to either use full URLs on the Source: lines or, if
the URLs are weird and RPM can't handle them, include them as comments.  See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL.

In a multiple license scenario, there needs to be some documentation of which
parts of the package are under which license.  See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines

I'm not really sure there's any point in having "Linux -" in those summary
entries.  Isn't it a bit obvious?

The compiler ends up being called with -O3.  I'm not sure this is a big deal,
really, but generally we like to see the default set of compiler flags applied.

I'm pretty sure that everything else about this package is OK, but there's a
lot there.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 492039] New: Review Request: perl-Jemplate - JavaScript Templating with Template Toolkit

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
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-Jemplate - JavaScript Templating with Template 
Toolkit
Alias: perl-Jemplate

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492039

   Summary: Review Request: perl-Jemplate - JavaScript Templating
with Template Toolkit
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
   URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Jemplate
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-Jemplate.spec
SRPM URL:
http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Jemplate-0.23-1.fc10.src.rpm

Description:
Jemplate is a templating framework for JavaScript that is built over
Perl's Template Toolkit (TT2). Jemplate parses TT2 templates using the
TT2 Perl framework, but with a twist. Instead of compiling the templates
into Perl code, it compiles them into JavaScript. Jemplate then provides
a JavaScript runtime module for processing the template code. Presto, we
have full featured JavaScript templating language!

Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257482

*rt-0.05

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 488096] Review Request: rygel - A UPnP v2 Media Server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488096


Peter Robinson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|needinfo?(pbrobin...@gmail. |
   |com)|




--- Comment #6 from Peter Robinson   2009-03-24 20:47:08 
EDT ---
I thought that the noarch feature was one that was introduced with F11/rawhide
so when I pushed it the F10 I removed that option, other than that the package
should be the same.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 455500] Review Request: OpenGTL -- graphics transformation languages (used by krita2)

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455500


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)  |
 Resolution||NOTABUG




--- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 20:46:14 
EDT ---
Then I'll close this as there's no package 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 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456190





--- Comment #51 from Derek Atkins   2009-03-24 20:40:42 EDT ---
Just because we cannot build freedos shouldn't imply we cannot distribute it. 
We /DO/ have the source code, and we can certainly distribute the source code
(along with the pre-built binary).  That's certainly legal as far as the GPL is
concerned, even if we can't reliably reproduce the binary using our compiler of
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 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456190





--- Comment #50 from Justin Zygmont   2009-03-24 
20:24:35 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #49)
> Bad news :(
> 
> Seems like FreeDOS can be built with Watcom C and Borland C Compiler only, 
> both
> of which are non-free. Building with dev86's bcc is most likely not possible
> now.
> 
> Do you think DOSEmu package would actually be usable without the FreeDOS image
> shipped?
> 
> I'm wondering if you are in touch with upstream of either FreeDOS, or DOSEmu 
> so
> that you could ask whether anyone's willing to help switching to free build
> framework (dev86) and whether there are any known technical difficulties with
> it?
> 
> See the thread here:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-March/thread.html#00053 
>  

I have followed up on this, it seems building with free tools is possible, but
not now, and maybe not ever.  Its a dam shame, does this mean its finished
here?


http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=op.ura4quaez9dfrf%40isor&forum_name=freedos-devel

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=ef6ac8350903231451p2e1e7091n3eebd87a34c456d5%40mail.gmail.com&forum_name=freedos-devel

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 455500] Review Request: OpenGTL -- graphics transformation languages (used by krita2)

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455500





--- Comment #16 from Matthew Woehlke   
2009-03-24 20:05:41 EDT ---
*Someone* needs to package it, but I'm not going to be able to sign a CLA at my
current employer.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 492019] New: Review Request: cfourcc - Change the FOURCC of an MPEG4 or DivX video.

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: cfourcc - Change the FOURCC of an MPEG4 or DivX video.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492019

   Summary: Review Request: cfourcc - Change the FOURCC of an
MPEG4 or DivX video.
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: yansta...@googlemail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://freeki.de/fedora/cfourcc.spec
SRPM URL: http://freeki.de/fedora/cfourcc-0.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description: With cfourcc you could change the FOURCC of an MPEG4 or DIVX video
on the command line.

The Problem with this programm is, that it only uses make install (wich
includes the build-process) instead of make && make install.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 492019] Review Request: cfourcc - Change the FOURCC of an MPEG4 or DivX video.

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492019


Simon Wesp  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||cassmod...@fedoraproject.or
   ||g
 Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478365] Review Request: perl-Verilog-CodeGen - Verilog code generator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478365





--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System   
2009-03-24 19:48:21 EDT ---
perl-Verilog-CodeGen-0.9.4-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora
10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Verilog-CodeGen-0.9.4-1.fc10

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478365] Review Request: perl-Verilog-CodeGen - Verilog code generator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478365





--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System   
2009-03-24 19:48:16 EDT ---
perl-Verilog-CodeGen-0.9.4-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Verilog-CodeGen-0.9.4-1.fc9

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 458714] Review Request: libkate - Libraries to handle the Kate bitstream format

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458714





--- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 19:44:50 
EDT ---
That was on x86_64 in my local mock on current rawhide with static-repos
enabled.  I did a koji scratch build as well to verify: 
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257463

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 458714] Review Request: libkate - Libraries to handle the Kate bitstream format

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458714





--- Comment #13 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)   2009-03-24 
19:34:36 EDT ---
Which Arch ? I expect it is on rawhide. Do you have the link for koji?

It worked few days ago from rawhide repositories (not koji):
http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/rawhide/x86_64/

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 475852] Review Request: gnustep-base - GNUstep Base library package

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475852





--- Comment #18 from Charles Lopes   2009-03-24 19:30:01 EDT 
---
I have not been able to build the latest package on mock with the
fedora-10-x86_64 configuration until I changed the install line to this:

make install DESTDIR=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} GNUSTEP_INSTALLATION_DOMAIN=SYSTEM

Without it, everything gets installed in "/usr/local". Could it be that you
build your package in an environment where /etc/GNUstep/GUNstep.conf has a
LOCAL domain set to "/usr"?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 458714] Review Request: libkate - Libraries to handle the Kate bitstream format

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458714





--- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 19:27:09 
EDT ---
This failed to build for me:

kate_parser.y: At top level:
kate_parser.y:1015: error: conflicting types for 'getline'
/usr/include/stdio.h:653: note: previous declaration of 'getline' was here
make[3]: *** [kateenc-kate_parser.o] Error 1

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 472150] Review Request: coot - crystallographic macromolecular building toolkit

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472150





--- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 19:16:04 
EDT ---
Indeed this does build.  Here's the complete rpmlint listing; I'm sorry for
any terrible line wrapping; this is big enough that I'm working in an external
editor.

  coot.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary Coot
Please don't include the name of the package in the summary.

  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcoot-tw.so.0.0.0
/lib64/libm.so.6
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-skeleton.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-mini-mol.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-skeleton.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-shelx.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-skeleton.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-coord-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-skeleton.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libccp4mg-surface.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libgpp4.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-shelx.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-ideal.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libgsl.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libgslcblas.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-coord-extras.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-geometry.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-db-main.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-high-res.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libccp4mg-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-utils.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libart_lgpl_2.so.2
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libatk-1.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libgio-2.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcairo.so.2
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libpango-1.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libfreetype.so.6
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libfontconfig.so.1
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libgmodule-2.0.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-atomutils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libclipper.so.2
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-sequence-view.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-isosurface.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-mini-mol.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-isosurface.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-shelx.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-isosurface.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-coord-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-isosurface.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libmmdb.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-isosurface.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-map-utils.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcoot-utils.so.0
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libcoot-analysis.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libclipper.so.2
  coot.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-d

[Bug 491892] Review Request: openscap - Set of open source libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491892





--- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant   2009-03-24 
18:51:43 EDT ---
Peter, the "fedora‑review" flag set to "?" means "someone is actively working
on the review", not "the package needs to be reviewed", as you seem to think...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491892] Review Request: openscap - Set of open source libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491892


manuel wolfshant  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478432] Review Request: dwscan - Displays access point information

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478432





--- Comment #10 from Fabian Affolter   2009-03-24 
18:37:54 EDT ---
Thanks again for your 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 480855] Review Request: bournal - Write personal, password-protected journal entries

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480855





--- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter   2009-03-24 
18:44:16 EDT ---
I will ask upstream what they are thinking of using a makefile to place the
files.  Since 1.2 there are a lot icon files...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478432] Review Request: dwscan - Displays access point information

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478432


Fabian Affolter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #11 from Fabian Affolter   2009-03-24 
18:38:43 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: dwscan 
Short Description: Displays access point information
Owners: fab
Branches: F-9 F-10
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491946] Review Request: odfpy07 - compat package for odfpy

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491946


manuel wolfshant  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478432] Review Request: dwscan - Displays access point information

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478432


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 18:28:48 EDT 
---
Sorry, I must have misunderstood your comment.  Everything looks fine to me
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 478291] Review Request: shtool - Portable shell tool

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478291


Fabian Affolter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter   2009-03-24 
18:08:21 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: shtool
Short Description: Portable shell tool
Owners: fab
Branches: F-9 F-10
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 469569] Review Request: latex2rtf - LaTeX to RTF converter that handles equations, figures, and cross-references

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469569





--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System   
2009-03-24 18:07:46 EDT ---
latex2rtf-1.9.19-5.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/latex2rtf-1.9.19-5.fc10

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 469569] Review Request: latex2rtf - LaTeX to RTF converter that handles equations, figures, and cross-references

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469569





--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System   
2009-03-24 18:07:08 EDT ---
latex2rtf-1.9.19-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/latex2rtf-1.9.19-5.fc9

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491952] Review Request: astronomy-menus - Astronomy menu for the Desktop

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491952


Marek Mahut  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mma...@redhat.com
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mma...@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 478291] Review Request: shtool - Portable shell tool

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478291





--- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter   2009-03-24 
18:07:44 EDT ---
Thanks for the review, Jason.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491992] Review Request: mod_falcon - An embedded Falcon interpreter for the Apache HTTP Server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491992





--- Comment #2 from Ben Boeckel   2009-03-24 18:00:27 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You might check the fedora-legal-list archives; Falcon has been covered here. 
> First hit on a google search for "fedora-legal-list falcon", for example.  You
> might also just look at how the base Falcon package handles this, which is to
> simply use GPLv2+.  It is not permissible to simply make up identifiers like
> "FPLLv1.1" that are not in the list of approved licenses/identifiers at
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing.  

Ah, alright. I'll just set the License: as GPLv2+.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491875] Review Request: unzoo - ZOO archive extractor

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491875





--- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-03-24 18:00:53 
EDT ---
- optflags are not used. Use
gcc %{optflags} -o unzoo -DSYS_IS_UNIX -O unzoo.c
in the build phase.

- Move rm -rf %{buildroot} to the top of the install phase.

- Drop the creation of the dir and just use
install -Dpm 755 unzoo %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/unzoo
as this will do the creation for you.

- Shipping source code as documentation is silly, please drop it. I see that
there is some documentation in the beginning of the source file, please extract
it to a text file (remove the unnecessary *'s and so on), ship it as Source1
and put it into %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 491875] Review Request: unzoo - ZOO archive extractor

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491875





--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-03-24 18:01:28 
EDT ---
And yes: you should use %{?dist} in the Release line.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476350] Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476350


Conrad Meyer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #9 from Conrad Meyer   2009-03-24 17:53:56 EDT 
---
Thanks!

New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: python-networkx
Short Description: Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks
Owners: konradm
Branches: 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 491875] Review Request: unzoo - ZOO archive extractor

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491875


Jussi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-03-24 17:48:46 
EDT ---
Taking on 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 478291] Review Request: shtool - Portable shell tool

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478291


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:44:00 EDT 
---
Somehow I missed your comment; sorry about that.

This package looks fine, thanks.  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 486302] Review Request: parrot - Parrot is a virtual machine.

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486302





--- Comment #19 from Gerd Pokorra   2009-03-24 
17:36:26 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Pynie compiles and runs just fine from an installed Parrot and from the Ubuntu
> packages.
> 
> Your packages are missing a number of development libraries necessary for
> building a language from source. You could include them in the 'parrot'
> package, but a better solution is to add a parrot-devel package for the
> developer tools. Let me know if you need a list of files to install (it will 
> be
> the same list as the Ubuntu packages).
> 
> Allison 

Hello Allison,

I remember your message for the Ubuntu packages and looked at the URL.
I think it will be easier for my, if you send me a list of the necessary files
which are needed to be installed. I am thinking to do this files in a tools
subpackage.

Gerd

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476350] Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476350


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:34:40 EDT 
---
Looks good, thanks.  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 478432] Review Request: dwscan - Displays access point information

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478432





--- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter   2009-03-24 
17:30:07 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Could you explain in the spec why you wish to override upstream's placement of
> the binary in /usr/sbin, then?  I'm not sure there's really any reasonable
> justification for it, but if you have one then I'll be happy to approve the
> package.  


I will not override the placement of the binary.  I reversed this in Release 3
of the package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 455500] Review Request: OpenGTL -- graphics transformation languages (used by krita2)

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455500


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)

Bug 455500 depends on bug 455502, which changed state.

Bug 455502 Summary: [PATCH] llvm interpreter needs -fPIC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455502

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED



--- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:26:14 
EDT ---
So this package recently popped back into the review queue when the bug
blocking it was cleared.However, I don't see any package to review here,
and the submitter still hasn't gotten past the CLA.  Is anything happening with
this package?  Should this ticket just be closed?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 470354] Review Request: noip - A dynamic DNS update client

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470354


Jussi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola   2009-03-24 17:20:42 
EDT ---
Thanks for the review!

New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: noip
Short Description: A dynamic DNS update client
Owners: jussilehtola
Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 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 491530] Review Request: letterslaughing-fonts - Decorative/LED sans-serif font

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491530





--- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-03-24 
17:20:30 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> hi,
> 
> The wishlist page for the font said :"Letters Laughing is a decorative/LED
> sans-serif font."  That's why i had registered it as sans-serif.. 

The wishlist pages are not problem-free, they're only as good as the original
reported made them, so as packager you need to exercise caution and check the
info provided here is correct when packaging.

> He'll add an OFL to the zip.. As for renaming the styles, he said he couldnt 
> do
> that.. Do i make this a multi spec with these families ? 

If upstream does not want to change the styles we certainly should not do it in
Fedora

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491530] Review Request: letterslaughing-fonts - Decorative/LED sans-serif font

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491530





--- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-03-24 
17:18:20 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)

> You may verify this with the following command:
> 
> grep -a -B 6 -A 84 'SIL OPEN FONT LICENSE' *.ttf


Check this and you'll see this is missing in the ttf in your package. Maybe you
didn't package the same version upstream uses (and anyway a detached txt file
is much better)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476350] Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476350





--- Comment #7 from Conrad Meyer   2009-03-24 17:17:00 EDT 
---
Switched all uses of %{__python} to python; commented out checks for now, with
a note; replaced a %define with %global:

http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/python-networkx.spec
http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/python-networkx-0.99-3.fc10.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478432] Review Request: dwscan - Displays access point information

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478432





--- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:15:45 EDT 
---
Could you explain in the spec why you wish to override upstream's placement of
the binary in /usr/sbin, then?  I'm not sure there's really any reasonable
justification for it, but if you have one then I'll be happy to approve the
package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 489418] Review Request: nssbackup - (Not so) Simple Backup Suite for desktop use

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489418





--- Comment #2 from Simon Wesp   2009-03-24 
17:12:20 EDT ---
sorry, wrong koji link

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257266

this is the correct 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 491992] Review Request: mod_falcon - An embedded Falcon interpreter for the Apache HTTP Server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491992





--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:12:04 EDT 
---
You might check the fedora-legal-list archives; Falcon has been covered here. 
First hit on a google search for "fedora-legal-list falcon", for example.  You
might also just look at how the base Falcon package handles this, which is to
simply use GPLv2+.  It is not permissible to simply make up identifiers like
"FPLLv1.1" that are not in the list of approved licenses/identifiers at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 470354] Review Request: noip - A dynamic DNS update client

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470354


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:03:32 EDT 
---
Hmm, too bad about the binary file.  That's some significant idiocy there, but
it's not your job to make that kind of change.

Anyway, given that, I'd say this package is fine.

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 491992] Review Request: mod_falcon - An embedded Falcon interpreter for the Apache HTTP Server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491992


Ben Boeckel  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||182235(FE-Legal)




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491992] New: Review Request: mod_falcon - An embedded Falcon interpreter for the Apache HTTP Server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: mod_falcon - An embedded Falcon interpreter for the 
Apache HTTP Server

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491992

   Summary: Review Request: mod_falcon - An embedded Falcon
interpreter for the Apache HTTP Server
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: maths...@gmail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/mod_falcon/mod_falcon.spec
SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/mod_falcon/mod_falcon-0.9.4-1.srpm
Description: Mod_falcon is a module that embeds the Falcon language interpreter
within the server, allowing Apache handlers to be written in Falcon.

rpmlint warns about the license (Falcon Programming Language License v1.1,
FPLLv1.1 in the spec ).
Debian has comments on it at
. IANAL, so I don't
know what applies to Fedora, but Debian did approve 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 476350] Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476350





--- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 17:01:24 EDT 
---
I've never understood why the template uses the macro form of the interpreter;
I always remove it myself and you're free to do the same.  The important thing
is consistency.

As for the checks, the point is for the packager to investigate the test suite
and either enable it, enable as much as can be run by patching out the bits
that can't, or to indicate that it's there but can't be run for whatever
reason.  I don't know what's the best course of action for this package, except
to know that the first option obviously doesn't work.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 489418] Review Request: nssbackup - (Not so) Simple Backup Suite for desktop use

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489418





--- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp   2009-03-24 
16:52:48 EDT ---
NEW UPSTREAM RELEASE!

SPEC:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/nssbackup-0.2~rc7/nssbackup.spec

SRPM:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/nssbackup-0.2~rc7/nssbackup-0.2-0.1.rc7.fc10.src.rpm

KOJI:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257227

RPMLint-Issues: (the same as in rc6)
nssbackup.noarch: W: no-dependency-on usermode
^^
usermode-gtk requires usermode

nssbackup.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/security/console.apps/nssbackup-config-gui-su
nssbackup.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/security/console.apps/nssbackup-restore-gui-su
^^
should be 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 456242] Review Request: gavl - A library for handling uncompressed audio and video data

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456242


Bug 456242 depends on bug 454888, which changed state.

Bug 454888 Summary: Review Request: libgdither - Library for applying dithering 
to PCM audio sources
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454888

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 454888] Review Request: libgdither - Library for applying dithering to PCM audio sources

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454888


Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476350] Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476350





--- Comment #5 from Conrad Meyer   2009-03-24 16:42:14 EDT 
---
I was only using '%{__python}' in %build because for whatever reason the
rpmdevtools spectemplate for python uses it (I would prefer plain 'python').
Should I disable the checks for now?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 481009] Review request: pothana2000-fonts - Unicode compliant OpenType font for Telugu

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481009


Nicolas Mailhot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net |sshed...@redhat.com
   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-03-24 
16:34:39 EDT ---
Ok, more review:

1. Your URL metadata field should point to upstream's web site, not directly to
the zip (probably http://www.kavya-nandanam.com/dload.htm)

2. It would be better if upstream's added the exact text of the font exception
to its licensing file, as the FSF may release another wording someday and then
we won't know which one was intended. Though it's already good enough for
packaging IMHO.

3. It would be better if upstream used "Regular" or "Normal" as style, most
apps won't know what to do with a "Pothana2000" style (I suspect it's the
"preferred OTF style" metadata in fontforge ; also opening the font in
fontforge results in many warnings)

4. You can drop the "%dir %{_fontdir}" line

5. rpmlint warns of
pothana2000-fonts.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 36, tab:
line 40)

6. 69 should be safe for now. You need to discuss with the packagers of other
Telugu fonts in Fedora to decide in common what the best priority should be for
this font

Anyway nothing blocking here, so I'll approve the package as-is but do try to
fix those little problems

⇮⇮⇮ APPROVED ⇮⇮⇮

You can now continue from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a

Thank you for packaging a new Fedora font

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 481009] Review request: pothana2000-fonts - Unicode compliant OpenType font for Telugu

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481009





--- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-03-24 
16:35:09 EDT ---
(aslo if you have the time please package Vemana2000 too)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476350] Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476350





--- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts   2009-03-24 16:33:18 EDT 
---
The licence stuff looks OK now.

The %check section is there, but the tests seem to fail all over the place.  I
guess it's possible that they can't be run; at least something seems to want
Gtk which would imply X.  I'm not really sure.

Also, if you're going to use the macro form %{__python} in the %build section
(which is OK although I've never understood what it was supposed to be good
for) you should also use it in %check if it turns out that there's any point in
running the checks.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 487913] Review Request: culmus-fancy-fonts - Fancy fonts for Hebrew

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487913


Dan Kenigsberg  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|needinfo?(dan...@cs.technio |
   |n.ac.il)|




--- Comment #3 from Dan Kenigsberg   2009-03-24 
16:30:42 EDT ---
thanks for the review. due to the not-so-little more work required, my other
obligations, and the marginal importance of this package, I am afraid that I
won't be able to fix it, certainly not on time for F11. I guess not many people
depend on the package, so Fedora will survive without it for a while.

(of course if someone else around the 'net agrees to take ownership, be my
guest)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491985] New: Review Request: emacs-gnuserv - Gnuserv allows you to attach to an already running Emacs

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: emacs-gnuserv - Gnuserv allows you to attach to an 
already running Emacs

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491985

   Summary: Review Request: emacs-gnuserv - Gnuserv allows you to
attach to an already running Emacs
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: beol...@gmail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://dev.sgu.ru/b/new/emacs-gnuserv.spec
SRPM URL: http://dev.sgu.ru/b/new/emacs-gnuserv-3.12.8-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description: gnuserv allows you to attach to an already running Emacs.  This
allows external programs to make use of Emacs' editing capabilities.  It is
like GNU Emacs' emacsserver/server.el, but has many more features.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491984] New: Review Request: emacs-twit - library for interfacing with twitter.com from Emacs.

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: emacs-twit - library for interfacing with twitter.com 
from Emacs.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491984

   Summary: Review Request: emacs-twit - library for interfacing
with twitter.com from Emacs.
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: beol...@gmail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://dev.sgu.ru/b/new/emacs-twit.spec
SRPM URL: emacs-twit-0.0.21-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description: This is the beginnings of a library for interfacing with
twitter.com from Emacs.  It is also (more importantly) some interactive
functions that use that library.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491984] Review Request: emacs-twit - library for interfacing with twitter.com from Emacs.

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491984





--- Comment #1 from Dan Atmakin   2009-03-24 16:26:13 EDT ---
sorry, this is correct url for src.rpm
http://dev.sgu.ru/b/new/emacs-twit-0.0.21-1.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 486302] Review Request: parrot - Parrot is a virtual machine.

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486302


Lubomir Rintel  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||lkund...@v3.sk
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk
   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 490867] Review Request: perl-Date-ICal - Perl extension for ICalendar date objects

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490867





--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System   
2009-03-24 16:10:30 EDT ---
perl-Date-ICal-1.72-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Date-ICal-1.72-1.fc9

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476346] Review Request: python-polybori - Framework for Boolean Rings

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476346





--- Comment #14 from Conrad Meyer   2009-03-24 16:07:29 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #13)
> * %define -> %global

Done.

> * %debug_package
> Perhaps modifying "LDFLAGS_LINUX" in polybori/Makefile.in will
> solve this issue.

This doesn't fix it --- I also removed -s as a link flag from SConstruct, and
now it builds without stripping at link time.

> * License
>   - Seems GPLv2+. Would you check this?

Ah. The only source I could find (sourceforge.net) just said GPL, so I assumed
GPLv3. I guess LICENSE says GPLv2+, good (and at least one source file says the
license information is in LICENSE).

> * Requires
>   This means -devel subpackage should have "Requires: boost-devel"
>   (here I am not saying about BuildRequires).

Good catch; fixed.

> -
> # rpm -ql python-polybori-devel | xargs grep -h 'include ' | sort | uniq
> -
>   will show some useful information.
> ! And this output shows that polybori/CDDManager.h contains:
> -
>102  #define CDDManager_h_
>103  #include "cacheopts.h"
>104  // load basic definitions
>105  #include "pbori_defs.h"
> -
>   Would you check if cacheopts.h can be really removed?

Well, it's an empty file and rpm complains about that. I will not remove it,
for now.

>   - Also please check the dependency for main package.
>   This may mean that python-polybori should have "Requires:
> python-imaging".

Done, thanks for spotting that.

> $ LANG=C ipbori
> /usr/bin/ipbori: line 66: ipython: command not found
> -
>   Perhaps "Requires: ipython" is needed.

Yep.

> * SourceURL
>   - Please follow:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net

Thanks, I couldn't find that when I was originally packaging this. Fixed.

> * Linkage on installed system libraries
>   - These two libraries undefined non-weak symbols. 
> This cannot be allowed when these libraries also have in
> -devel subpackage named "libfoo.so" used for linkage against 
> these libraries, because these symbols will cause linkage error.

What do I need to fix for this?

> * Documents
>   - I prefer to include README as %doc of main package for this case.
>   - ChangeLog seems useful for -devel subpackage.

Ok, added.

Update URLs:
http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/python-polybori.spec
http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/python-polybori-0.5-4.fc10.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 490867] Review Request: perl-Date-ICal - Perl extension for ICalendar date objects

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490867





--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System   
2009-03-24 16:10:36 EDT ---
perl-Date-ICal-1.72-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Date-ICal-1.72-1.fc10

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 490867] Review Request: perl-Date-ICal - Perl extension for ICalendar date objects

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490867





--- Comment #4 from Xavier Bachelot   2009-03-24 16:07:39 
EDT ---
Imported and built for devel, F-9, F-10, EL-4 and EL-5.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 480887] Review Request: kguitar - Guitar Tabulature Music Editor

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480887


Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu




--- Comment #17 from Rex Dieter   2009-03-24 16:00:57 EDT 
---
fyi, in comment #8 , pertaining to desktop file location, for posterity, the
comment 

"Is it needed that the desktop file is installed under
%_datadir/applications/kde, not under %_datadir/applications? Such desktop
files cannot be seem from GNOME"

ss incorrect.  Subdirectories of applications/ is certainly allowed and
supported by any desktop following the xdg spec (including gnome).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491980] New: Review Request: python-bauble - Biodiversity collection manager

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: python-bauble -  Biodiversity collection manager

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491980

   Summary: Review Request: python-bauble -  Biodiversity
collection manager
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/python-bauble-0.8.6/python-bauble.spec


SRPM URL:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/python-bauble-0.8.6/python-bauble-0.8.6-1.fc10.src.rpm


Koji build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1257142


Description:
Bauble is a software application to help you manage a collection 
of botanical specimens. It is intended to be used by botanic gardens, 
herbaria, arboreta, etc. to manage their collection information. 
It is a open, free, cross-platform alternative to 
BG-Base and similar software.
Features:

 * Bauble is designed to be simple, 
   elegant and intuitive.
 * Bauble can use different database backends 
   and is tested against SQLite and PostgreSQL.
 * Bauble can generate reports through an XSL formatter backend.
 * Bauble is transaction safe.
 * Bauble can export data in CSV or Access to Biological Collection Data (ABCD)
   format. In the future we hope to support other standard formats such as
   DarwinCore, ITF2, BioCASE, TAPIR, etc.
 * Bauble supports tagging. You can tag any arbitrary data stored in a Bauble
   managed database with arbitrary names.

This Version comes with SQLite support. You need to install
 * the package "MySQL-python" for MySQL-support
 * the package "python-psycopg2" for PostgreSQL-support


RPMLINT:
rpmlint is silent :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 487665] Review Request: soud - Tools for hardware related services based on udev events

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487665


Toshio Ernie Kuratomi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||a.bad...@gmail.com
   Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+




--- Comment #17 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi   2009-03-24 
15:48:10 EDT ---
cvs done.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 478365] Review Request: perl-Verilog-CodeGen - Verilog code generator

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478365


Toshio Ernie Kuratomi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||a.bad...@gmail.com
   Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+




--- Comment #14 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi   2009-03-24 
15:37:20 EDT ---
cvs done.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 461425] Review Request: daap-sharp - DAAP client library for Mono

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461425


Jason Tibbitts  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||201449(FE-DEADREVIEW)
   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 491952] New: Review Request: astronomy-menus - Astronomy menu for the Desktop

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: astronomy-menus - Astronomy menu for the Desktop

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491952

   Summary: Review Request: astronomy-menus - Astronomy menu for
the Desktop
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/astronomy-menus.spec
SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/astronomy-menus-1.0-1.fc11.src.rpm

Astronomy submenu for the Education menu, for better usability of the
Fedora Astronomy packages.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 488096] Review Request: rygel - A UPnP v2 Media Server

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488096


Michel Alexandre Salim  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||needinfo?(pbrobin...@gmail.
   ||com)




--- Comment #5 from Michel Alexandre Salim   
2009-03-24 15:21:03 EDT ---
ping? it looks like Rawhide's gupnp-vala is older than F-10's (it's still not
noarch). If you could rebuild an up-to-date version then we can get this review
underway -- 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 491268] Review Request: perl-autodie - Replace functions with equivalents which succeed or die

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491268





--- Comment #13 from Chris Weyl   2009-03-24 15:17:34 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> autodie is a core perl package (perl-5.10 branch currently contains
> autodie-1.998)
> Consequently, it should be maintained inside the main perl package.
> perl-5.10.0-64, to appear soon in rawhide and F-9 and F-10 testing updates,
> contains autodie-1.999.

Awesome.  Thanks Stepan!  :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 461425] Review Request: daap-sharp - DAAP client library for Mono

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461425


Michel Alexandre Salim  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||WONTFIX
   Flag|needinfo?(ianburr...@gmail. |
   |com)|




--- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim   
2009-03-24 15:13:10 EDT ---
Closing due to lack of response

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491767] Review Request: nss-ldapd - An nsswitch module which uses directory servers

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491767





--- Comment #9 from Nalin Dahyabhai   2009-03-24 15:05:08 EDT 
---
Which ones?  The flags that accompany auto-generated shared library deps only
note that they were auto-generated.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491946] New: Review Request: odfpy07 - compat package for odfpy

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: odfpy07 - compat package for odfpy

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491946

   Summary: Review Request: odfpy07 - compat package for odfpy
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: low
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: daniel...@gmail.com
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~danielsmw/odfpy07/odfpy07.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~danielsmw/odfpy07/odfpy07-0.7-3.fc10.src.rpm
Description: A compat package for odfpy.  This package was created and
submitted to fix a bug with mw-render, which requires odfpy 0.7.  I should also
note that this is my first package, and I'd need a sponsor before I could
actually get this in the repositories.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491128] Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491128





--- Comment #8 from Zarko   2009-03-24 14:51:59 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > I can not open a new project until I get a sponsor for the first one, isn't 
> > it?
> > 
> > Zarko  
> 
> You can have more than review, I started with 5 requests.
> 

OK, than I'll build something else :)

> P.S  photoprint-0.4.0-3.fc10.src.rpm builds OK at Koji on all targets.  

Good to know that.
Thanks for help.

bye
Zarko

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 453422] Review Request: songbird - Mozilla based multimedia player

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453422





--- Comment #38 from David Halik   2009-03-24 14:49:15 
EDT ---
Good news and bad news.

The good news is that both the above mentioned bugs are fixed.

Songbird bug 15401 is indeed fixed in 0.10.22 and Songbird bug 15432 has been
patched.

The bad news is that it's looking like building an internal gstreamer is going
to have to happen. Each Songbird stable release has any number of gstreamer
patches applied, and if we continue to build against the system libraries we
will be missing anything that has been upstreamed by Songbird. In order to
offer a stable product I don't see how we can run with system libraries since
the system gstreamer will always be behind what has been checked in.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491767] Review Request: nss-ldapd - An nsswitch module which uses directory servers

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491767





--- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-03-24 
14:45:52 EDT ---
So that dependency is already included in library dependency.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 491128] Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491128





--- Comment #7 from leigh scott   2009-03-24 
14:42:31 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I can not open a new project until I get a sponsor for the first one, isn't 
> it?
> 
> Zarko  

You can have more than review, I started with 5 requests.

P.S  photoprint-0.4.0-3.fc10.src.rpm builds OK at Koji on all targets.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


[Bug 476346] Review Request: python-polybori - Framework for Boolean Rings

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476346





--- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka   2009-03-24 
14:37:22 EDT ---
Some notes:

* %define -> %global
  - Current packaging guidelines suggest to use %global instead
of %define, especially when defining nested macros, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python#System_Architecture
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define
(The latter one is still under "Drafts" category, but this is already
accepted by FESCo)

* %debug_package
-
# and apparently
# also stops checking other libs once it hits the first static lib
-
  - The problem is not there. The real issue is that the installed
shared libraries are already stripped:
-
Symlinking from libgroebner-0.5.0.so to
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-polybori-0.5-3.fc11.1.x86_64/usr/lib64/libgroebner.so
g++ -o polybori/libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 -s -shared
-Wl,-soname,libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0 
-
note that "-s" option is passed to g++.
Perhaps modifying "LDFLAGS_LINUX" in polybori/Makefile.in will
solve this issue.

* License
  - Seems GPLv2+. Would you check this?

* Requires
  - Would you check the dependency "i.e. Requires" for -devel subpackage?
 ! For example, polybori/groebner/groebner_alg.h contains:
-
12  #include 
13  #include "groebner_defs.h"
14  #include "pairs.h"
15  #include 
-
  This means -devel subpackage should have "Requires: boost-devel"
  (here I am not saying about BuildRequires).
-
# rpm -ql python-polybori-devel | xargs grep -h 'include ' | sort | uniq
-
  will show some useful information.
! And this output shows that polybori/CDDManager.h contains:
-
   102  #define CDDManager_h_
   103  #include "cacheopts.h"
   104  // load basic definitions
   105  #include "pbori_defs.h"
-
  Would you check if cacheopts.h can be really removed?

  - Also please check the dependency for main package.
! For example, polybori/nf.py contains:
-
81  global mat_counter
82  mat_counter=mat_counter+1
83  import Image, ImageDraw
-
  This may mean that python-polybori should have "Requires:
python-imaging".

-
# rpm -ql python-polybori | grep -v /usr/share/doc | LANG=C xargs grep -h
'import ' | grep -v Binary | sort | uniq
-
  will show some useful information.

! Also
-
$ LANG=C ipbori
/usr/bin/ipbori: line 66: ipython: command not found
-
  Perhaps "Requires: ipython" is needed.

* SourceURL
  - Please follow:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net

* Linkage on installed system libraries
--
# rpmlint python-polybori
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 Cudd_zddUnion
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 _Z12defaultErrorSs
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 Cudd_ReadZddSize
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 cuddCacheInsert1
.
.
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libgroebner-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 Cudd_zddUnion
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libgroebner-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 _Z12defaultErrorSs
python-polybori.i586: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib/libgroebner-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 Cudd_ReadZddSize
.
.
--
  - These two libraries undefined non-weak symbols. 
This cannot be allowed when these libraries also have in
-devel subpackage named "libfoo.so" used for linkage against 
these libraries, because these symbols will cause linkage error.

* Documents
  - I prefer to include README as %doc of main package for 

[Bug 486977] Review Request: gnu-free-fonts

2009-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486977


Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||RAWHIDE




--- Comment #23 from Jon Ciesla   2009-03-24 14:30:52 EDT ---
Imported and built.  Bugs for known dependant packages updated.  freefont EOL
ticket updated.

Thanks all!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review


  1   2   3   >