[Bug 497283] Review Request: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate - Port to Perl of the syntax highlight engine of the Kate texteditor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497283 --- Comment #7 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 02:01:39 EDT --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499951] Review Request: netdiscover - A network address discovering/monitoring tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499951 --- Comment #5 from arthurguru arthurg.w...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 02:41:52 EDT --- Hi Patrick, Did another informal review of netdiscover Koji build on PPC arch worked fine http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355750 Found an rpmlint warning: rpmlint netdiscover.spec netdiscover.spec:55: W: macro-in-%changelog doc 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Not OK ... I know the feeling. Best regards, Arthur Gouros. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479951] Review Request: iniparser - a library for parsing ini-style files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479951 Alex Hudson (Fedora Address) fed...@alexhudson.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Alex Hudson (Fedora Address) fed...@alexhudson.com 2009-05-15 02:39:47 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: iniparser Short Description: a library for parsing ini-style files Owners: alexh Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: Apologies for dropping the ball on this one; my dev. machine was out for a while and I'd forgotten it was outstanding - thanks for reminding 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 494986] Review Request: mysqludf_xql - MySQL UDF library for XML output
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494986 --- Comment #15 from arthurguru arthurg.w...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 02:46:53 EDT --- Hi Yanko, Just did another informal review of mysqludf_xql. All went well. Best regards, Arthur Gouros. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500958] New: Review Request: perl-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager
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-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500958 Summary: Review Request: perl-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmasl...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-PAR-Packer.spec SRPM URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-PAR-Packer-0.991-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: This module implements the App::Packer::Backend interface, for generating stand-alone executables, perl scripts and PAR files. Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355752 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500958] Review Request: perl-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500958 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||500959 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497283] Review Request: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate - Port to Perl of the syntax highlight engine of the Kate texteditor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497283 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||500959 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498189] Review Request: perl-JavaScript-Minifier-XS - XS based JavaScript minifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498189 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||500959 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500959] Review Request: perl-Task-Padre-Plugin-Deps - Task::Padre::Plugin::Deps Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500959 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||498189, 500958, 497283 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500959] New: Review Request: perl-Task-Padre-Plugin-Deps - Task::Padre::Plugin::Deps Perl module
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-Task-Padre-Plugin-Deps - Task::Padre::Plugin::Deps Perl module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500959 Summary: Review Request: perl-Task-Padre-Plugin-Deps - Task::Padre::Plugin::Deps Perl module Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmasl...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Task-Padre-Plugin-Deps.spec SRPM URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Task-Padre-Plugin-Deps-0.12-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Simply plugins for Padre gui for Perl. Build is not available because of missing BR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498204] Review Request: perl-Wx-Perl-DataWalker - implement subclass that shows relatively simple structure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498204 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 03:14:40 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355744 + rpmlint output for SRPM and for RPM. perl-Wx-Perl-DataWalker.src: W: summary-not-capitalized implement subclass that shows relatively simple structure == fix this + source files match upstream url d199c6a765168282c574c744bfdf707e10bb5549 Wx-Perl-DataWalker-0.02.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=1, Tests=1, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr 0.01 sys + 0.27 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.33 CPU) + Package perl-Wx-Perl-DataWalker-0.02-2.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(Wx::Perl::DataWalker) = 0.02 perl(Wx::Perl::DataWalker::CurrentLevel) = 0.01 Requires: perl = 0:5.008001 perl(Devel::Size) perl(Scalar::Util) perl(Wx) perl(Wx::Event) perl(Wx::Perl::DataWalker::CurrentLevel) perl(constant) perl(overload) perl(strict) perl(warnings) + Not a GUI application Suggestions: 1) fix rpmlint message 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 500958] Review Request: perl-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500958 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 03:23:37 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355752 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 2df43a4a76fc50b8d07bc3fea7b8f8465d4b444f PAR-Packer-0.991.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. + Package perl-PAR-Packer-0.991-1.fc12.i586 = Provides: perl(App::Packer::PAR) = 0.91 perl(PAR::Filter) = 0.03 perl(PAR::Filter::Bleach) perl(PAR::Filter::Bytecode) perl(PAR::Filter::Obfuscate) perl(PAR::Filter::PatchContent) perl(PAR::Filter::PodStrip) perl(PAR::Packer) = 0.991 perl(PAR::StrippedPARL::Base) = 0.975 perl(PAR::StrippedPARL::Dynamic) = 0.958 perl(PAR::StrippedPARL::Static) = 0.958 perl(pp) = 0.977 Requires: /usr/bin/perl libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.2) libcrypt.so.1 libdl.so.2 libm.so.6 libnsl.so.1 libperl.so libpthread.so.0 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2) libresolv.so.2 libutil.so.1 perl = 0:5.006 perl(App::Packer::PAR) perl(Archive::Zip) perl(Config) perl(Cwd) perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) perl(File::Basename) perl(File::Find) perl(File::Spec) perl(File::Temp) perl(FindBin) perl(Getopt::ArgvFile) perl(Getopt::Long) perl(Module::ScanDeps) perl(PAR) perl(PAR::Filter) perl(PAR::Packer) perl(Tk) perl(Tk::Balloon) perl(Tk::Dialog) perl(Tk::LabEntry) perl(base) perl(constant) perl(pp) perl(strict) perl(vars) perl(warnings) rtld(GNU_HASH) + Not a GUI application Should: 1) Seems you forgot to remove BuildRequires: perl = 1:5.6.0 Remove this. 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 498204] Review Request: perl-Wx-Perl-DataWalker - implement subclass that shows relatively simple structure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498204 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:29:58 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Wx-Perl-DataWalker Short Description: Implement subclass that shows relatively simple structure Owners: mmaslano Branches: F-11 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500958] Review Request: perl-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500958 --- Comment #2 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:30:59 EDT --- Wow, you are fast. Thank you. Useless BR was 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 500958] Review Request: perl-PAR-Packer - PAR Packager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500958 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:31:43 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-PAR-Packer Short Description: PAR Packager Owners: mmaslano Branches: F-11 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497283] Review Request: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate - Port to Perl of the syntax highlight engine of the Kate texteditor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497283 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 03:37:05 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355746 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 0afce4a365d5a13a40f13031a1f6dc9bfa6a9788 Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate-0.04.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=1, Tests=528, 47 wallclock secs ( 0.13 usr 0.00 sys + 47.13 cusr 0.05 csys = 47.31 CPU) + Package perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate-0.04-4.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate) = 0.04 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ABC) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::AHDL) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ANSI_C89) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ASP) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::AVR_Assembler) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::AWK) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Ada) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Alerts) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::All) = 0.02 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Ansys) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Apache_Configuration) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Asm6502) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Bash) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::BibTeX) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::C) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::CGiS) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::CMake) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::CSS) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::CSS_PHP) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::CUE_Sheet) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Cdash) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Cg) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ChangeLog) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Cisco) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Clipper) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ColdFusion) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Common_Lisp) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ComponentminusPascal) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Cplusplus) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::D) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::De_DE) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Debian_Changelog) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Debian_Control) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Desktop) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Diff) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Doxygen) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::E_Language) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Eiffel) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Email) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::En_US) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Euphoria) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Ferite) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Fortran) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::FourGL) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::FourGLminusPER) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::FreeBASIC) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::GDL) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::GLSL) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::GNU_Assembler) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::GNU_Gettext) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::HTML) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Haskell) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::IDL) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::ILERPG) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::INI_Files) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Inform) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Intel_x86_NASM) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::JSP) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::Java) = 0.03 perl(Syntax::Highlight::Engine::Kate::JavaScript) = 0.03
[Bug 447368] Review Request: schroot - Execute commands in a chroot environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447368 --- Comment #14 from Tomas Hoger tho...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:41:59 EDT --- Given my actions backlog, I can't really promise you to have any serious look at the moment, sorry. ;( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226429] Merge Review: sqlite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226429 --- Comment #13 from Panu Matilainen pmati...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:40:42 EDT --- Okay, I fixed the rpmlint nitpickery over tab-vs-space etc + obsoletes + the io tests (the difference comes from SQLITE_DISABLE_DIRSYNC build-switch so its ok) in devel. With that, as of sqlite 3.6.14, the test-suite is error-free on ix86 + x86_64, the other testsuite-patches here dont seem to be relevant (at least anymore). Except, hmm, what's with the use .so instead of .la patch? PPC (both 32 and 64bit) is not quite there however, this nan-breakage: http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/tktview?tn=3404 and then a pile of rtree-tests fails (possibly due to the nan-issue, haven't looked that closely). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497283] Review Request: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate - Port to Perl of the syntax highlight engine of the Kate texteditor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497283 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:50:05 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate Short Description: Port to Perl of the syntax highlight engine of the Kate texteditor Owners: mmaslano Branches: F-11 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226429] Merge Review: sqlite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226429 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(robin.norw...@gma ||il.com) --- Comment #14 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 03:53:17 EDT --- Thanks, Panu! -- Robin: Can you continue with the review, please? The packages are here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=485 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478749] Review Request: dinotrace - X11 waveform viewer for electronics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478749 --- Comment #33 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-05-15 04:03:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) Manuel, can you review the small package emacs-verilog-mode for me, I'll commit only to EL-5 until I have clearance from the mailing list to commit for F-XX branches. Sure, it will be my pleasure to do it, but not sooner than next week. I am really really very busy at work these weeks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495564] Review Request: libguestfs - Access and modify virtual machine disk images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495564 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 04:35:44 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libguestfs REMOVE Branch: F-10 Sorry about this - I spent some time trying to backport the necessary enhancement to qemu into the version of qemu in F-10, but it's a lot more complicated than I expected. So I'd like to remove the F-10 branch from 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 487114] Review Request: gvrpcd - A program for announcing VLANs using GVRP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487114 Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-05-15 04:37:16 EDT --- Haven't found further issues. Instead of depending on chkconfig and initscripts, you can prefer a dependency on /sbin/chkconfig and /sbin/service instead, since you execute those tools with absolute path. The dependency on those file locations is not more expensive than requiring the package names. The file Provides for files in many (or all) *bin* paths as well as files in /etc are covered by the primary metadata file. More packages do it already, too. $ repoquery --whatrequires /sbin/chkconfig|wc -l 364 $ repoquery --whatrequires chkconfig|wc -l 202 APPROVED : gvrpcd-1.3-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 04:54:03 EDT --- w3m -dump http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/uml/index.html index.html is not OK since the build nodes don't have an internet connection. List the file as Source1 instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487978] Review Request: sqlitebrowser - Design and edit database files compatible with SQLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487978 Karel Volný kvo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kvo...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Karel Volný kvo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 05:21:25 EDT --- just a few notes ... I just tried the .spec on RHEL-5: * I had to change BuildRequires qt3-devel to qt-devel * I had to include /usr/lib64/qt-3.3/bin in path to be able to use qmake * I had to set QTDIR=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3 otherwise the build went fine, and I can use sqlitebrowser without any problems (on x86_64, for the record) note that in project svn, there were some efforts to port this to Qt4, so personally, I'd throw this version away and try to encourage the author to release the new version including the possibility of dynamic linking -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487114] Review Request: gvrpcd - A program for announcing VLANs using GVRP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487114 --- Comment #18 from Jasper Capel fedora-jas...@newnewyork.nl 2009-05-15 05:31:39 EDT --- Thanks. :) I'll change the requires too, it's nicer to depend on the binaries I actually need than on package names. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487114] Review Request: gvrpcd - A program for announcing VLANs using GVRP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487114 Jasper Capel fedora-jas...@newnewyork.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Jasper Capel fedora-jas...@newnewyork.nl 2009-05-15 05:32:38 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gvrpcd Short Description: A program for announcing VLANs using GVRP. Owners: jasper Branches: EL-5, F-10, F-11 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 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 05:43:11 EDT --- Yes, very good point. I'll post an updated package in a moment containing that a few other fixes ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 05:51:09 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree-1.0.1-2.src.rpm * Fri May 15 2009 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com - 1.0.1-2 - Include the index file as a source file. - Improve the description, remove spelling mistakes and other typos. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi 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 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926
--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-15
06:14:44 EDT ---
Created an attachment (id=344112)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=344112)
Patch to compile
Compiles with the attached.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355776
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355793
i.e.
#include linux/types.h
#include sys/types.h
fails but
#include sys/types.h
#include linux/types.h
succeeds. ref (from google):
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0902.0/01335.html
Some notes (note that I have not tested this software)
- suggest to add INSTALL=install -p to 'make install' to
keep timestamps on installed files
- This package should own the directory %{_datadir}/%{name}/
- Would you check if the following build.log what you expect?
Optional engines support:
xine engine : yes
libvlc engine ..: no
MPlayer engine .: no
xine-lib engine : no
GStreamer library engine ...: no
It seems that xine-lib engine GStreamer library engine
can be enabled with some BRs in Fedora and some configure option,
however configure.ac says they are experimental so
I am not sure if you intentionally disabled this or not.
?? From src/xine_engine.cc, this software seems
to launch xine program :
49 void XineEngine::play(const Glib::ustring mrl)
50 {
56 StringList argv;
57 argv.push_back(xine);
115 try
116 {
117 Glib::spawn_async_with_pipes(/tmp,
118 argv,
However xine binary is in xine package, which is in
rpmfusion-free. Does this software work even if
xine rpm is 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 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d...@danny.cz --- Comment #3 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-05-15 06:27:26 EDT --- Please see http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 06:37:02 EDT --- Mock build is OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922
--- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 06:36:39
EDT ---
rpmlint output is clean.
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
NEEDSWORK
- License in source code is GPL+ not GPLv2. License field must be GPL+.
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. ~OK
- It's also possible to use the original srpm as the source:
Source0:
ftp://ftp.owlriver.com/pub/mirror/ORC/zerofree/zerofree-1.0.1-1orc.src.rpm
BuildRequires: cpio
# Create build directory without unpacking sources
%setup -T -c -n %{name}-%{version}
# Unpack original srpm
rpm2cpio %{SOURCE0} | cpio -i
# Unpack tar file
tar zxf zerofree-%{version}.tgz
Then you need to change directory to %{name}-%{version} before compiling
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSWORK
- Use
make CC=gcc $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
instead of
make RPM_OPT_FLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
to honor optflags and
cp -p %{SOURCE1} .
to preserve time stamp of the web page.
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. N/A
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. N/A
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. NEEDSWORK
- Fix the optflag problem.
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. NEEDSWORK
- Use
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. NEEDSWORK
- The tag is %{?dist} not %{?_dist}
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498748] Review Request: rpmdepsize - A tool for visualizing RPM dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498748 --- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 06:47:31 EDT --- Whoops, forgot to post here the new spec srpm: http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/rpmdepsize.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/rpmdepsize-1.0-3.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 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:03:01 EDT --- I think this should fix everything mentioned in the review: Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree-1.0.1-3.fc11.src.rpm * Fri May 15 2009 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com - 1.0.1-3 - Use the upstream SRPM directly, unpacking source from it. - License is GPLv2+. - Fix use of dist macro. - Pass the RPM OPTFLAGS to C compiler (should also fix debuginfo pkg). - Use 'cp -p' to preserve timestamps when copying index.html file. - Fix the defattr 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 465636] Review Request: FireHOL - a Linux iptables packet filtering firewall builder for humans
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465636 --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 07:09:13 EDT --- Some cleanups. http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/firehol.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/firehol-1.273-4.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 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rjo...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rjo...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:11:54 EDT --- Taking for 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 465636] Review Request: FireHOL - a Linux iptables packet filtering firewall builder for humans
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465636 --- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 07:22:33 EDT --- rpmlint output: firehol.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/firehol/firehol.conf 0640 firehol.noarch: E: subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/firehol 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. These can both be ignored, since 1. the firewall config is not supposed to be read by other than root and 2. there service that sticks around is iptables; FireHOL doesn't have anything of itself to monitor with a subsys. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487521] Review Request: pypar - Parallel programming with Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487521 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 07:20:26 EDT --- Okay, fixed everything. rpmlint output is clean. http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/pypar.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/pypar-2.1.0_66-2.fc10.src.rpm (I didn't add eog as a requirement since it's only a requirement for the one example.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:24:22 EDT --- Builds OK in Koji. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1355896 Comment: the name of the executable is 'wannier90.x'. Not a blocker, but a little unusual. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 07:27:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) * Fri May 15 2009 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com - 1.0.1-3 - Use the upstream SRPM directly, unpacking source from it. - License is GPLv2+. The license is not GPLv2+, it's GPL+ (also GPLv1 is OK). See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_do_I_figure_out_what_version_of_the_GPL.2FLGPL_my_package_is_under.3F The source code doesn't mention any version, it just states that the code is under the GPL. = License field must be GPL+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:28:50 EDT --- rpmlint says: wannier90-devel.i586: W: no-documentation It would be worth adding at least the license file to this package, I think. wannier90-libs.i586: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/libwannier.so You probably want to strip this one, although I guess this might break debuginfo. wannier90-libs.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libwannier.so This is a consequence of upstream's peculiar build process. Persuade them to use libtool :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 --- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:31:52 EDT --- Comment: Would be worth including the examples/ subdirectory from the source, particularly since it is mentioned in the README file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922
--- Comment #10 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 07:29:42
EDT ---
If you want, you can shorten
cd %{name}-%{version}
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sbindir}
cp zerofree $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sbindir}
to a one-liner:
install -D -p -m 755 %{name}-%{version}/zerofree
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sbindir}/zerofree
(This also preserves the time stamp, even though it doesn't matter in case of a
compiled binary.)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #4 from Zarko (grof) zarko.pin...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 07:41:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) - Would you check if the following build.log what you expect? Optional engines support: xine engine : yes libvlc engine ..: no MPlayer engine .: no xine-lib engine : no GStreamer library engine ...: no It seems that xine-lib engine GStreamer library engine can be enabled with some BRs in Fedora and some configure option, however configure.ac says they are experimental so I am not sure if you intentionally disabled this or not. Of course, I investigates this. The other engines are experimental, and I do not think that is smart to compile on Fedora something what is experimental ;) This is documented in config help: -- --enable-xine-engineEnable Xine engine support (default disabled) --enable-mplayer-engine Enable experimental MPlayer engine support (default disabled) --enable-libvlc-engine Enable experimental VLC library engine support (default disabled) --enable-xine-lib-engine Enable experimental xine-lib engine support (default disabled) --enable-libgstreamer-engine Enable experimental GStreamer library engine support (default enabled) -- But if you think that it is all right to be compiled with these engines, no problem, I will compile :) However xine binary is in xine package, which is in rpmfusion-free. Does this software work even if xine rpm is removed? Me TV has own xine engine and xine-lib build inside itself. So, I think that it do not need any xine dependency. Does this program work without xine rpm I still do not sure, but I'll investigate this, too. This is the part of Me TV's /src directory list: - 6200 2009-05-02 01:40 xine_engine.cc 1554 2009-05-02 01:43 xine_engine.h 277256 2009-05-14 15:32 xine_engine.o 12210 2009-03-27 13:45 xine_lib_engine.cc 2209 2009-05-08 12:38 xine_lib_engine.h 60648 2009-05-14 15:32 xine_lib_engine.o - I investigated licenses for Me TV and Xine, and all of these sources are under GPL license, so I can not find a reason why should not to be packaged for Fedora repo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #11 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:46:56 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree-1.0.1-4.fc11.src.rpm I have made the two changes you suggested. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880
--- Comment #6 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:42:43
EDT ---
? rpmlint output
Please see comment 4. I think at least some of
these are worth fixing.
+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
GPLv2+
+ license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
2a547276e25d2345480ec3717c6c2f3f / 6259705
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
built in Koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
+ binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ %defattr line
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
(documentation is 740K unpacked, but this is still not a
really significant part of the whole package)
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
+ header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
+ libfoo.so must go in -devel
(in -libs, which is also OK)
+ -devel must require the fully versioned base
(requires -libs, which is OK)
+ packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8
Optional:
n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
available
+ reviewer should build the package in mock
+ the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
+ review should test the package functions as described
(I tested it ran on the examples)
+ scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or
/usr/sbin
-
I would like to hear your feedback on comments 3, 4 and 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 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #5 from Zarko (grof) zarko.pin...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 07:45:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Please see http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299 Hmm, I read it, but I still can not find any non-GPL licenses info under this source, and all dependencies what its call is on Fedora repo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500261] Pre-Review Request: maven2-plugin-shade - Maven Shade Plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500261 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 07:59:41 EDT --- Needed changes: - the license field should be ASL 2.0. Source files has ASL 2.0 license. - instructions for generating Source0 are broken -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 08:05:37 EDT --- Everything has been fixed, the package has been 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 500264] Pre-Review Request: plexus-resources - Plexus Component Descriptor Creator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500264 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 08:11:17 EDT --- Needed fixes: - License is wrong. Most of the source files has MIT license header and the rest don't have any license header, so I assume the license should be changed to MIT. - Instructions for generating Source0 are not full. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 08:10:15 EDT --- Thanks Jussi! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: zerofree Short Description: Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero Owners: rjones Branches: F-10 F-11 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 500265] Pre-Review Request: plexus-naming - Plexus Naming Component
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500265 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 08:18:41 EDT --- Needed changes: - There is nothing about where are sources coming from and I haven't found it in plexus svn. - I haven't found anything about the license in the provided sources. If the license is correct it should become ASL 2.0. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #6 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-05-15 08:25:34 EDT --- The problem is not the license, but with patents, because without patented codecs the me-tv application is useless.(In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #3) Please see http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299 Hmm, I read it, but I still can not find any non-GPL licenses info under this source, and all dependencies what its call is on Fedora repo. The problem is not the license, but patents, because without patented codecs the me-tv application is useless. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500266] Pre-Review Request: plexus-registry - Plexus Registry Component
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500266 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 08:29:33 EDT --- Needed changes: - license should become ASL 2.0 - Source0 fetch instructions are not full - if the rest of the Sources are generated with mvn ant:ant it should be mentioned -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471915] Review Request: jbossweb2 - JBoss Web Server based on Apache Tomcat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471915 --- Comment #29 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 08:33:59 EDT --- I did build it: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1304544 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471915] Review Request: jbossweb2 - JBoss Web Server based on Apache Tomcat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471915 --- Comment #28 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 08:33:32 EDT --- The JSON package is done (although I may have forgotten to build it ... will check). I don't know about the JBoss JAR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491616] Review Request: mingw32-zfstream - MinGW Windows C++ abstraction library for compressed and non-compressed file I/O
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491616
Wojciech Pilorz wpil...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wpil...@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from Wojciech Pilorz wpil...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 08:37:44
EDT ---
There was a bug report from Hiroshi Kuno on
zlib-devel mailing list at Feb 6, 2009:
Please find it attached below, as well as response form Mark Adler.
I would suggest looking at the bug, as it might propagate to zfstream;
---
I found a bug in minizip, when i create a zip file on a FD.
That lose a write error (i.e. disk full), and return ZIP_OK.
Thus, the minizip make a broken zip file without a error.
** Where is bug.
zipCloseFileInZipRaw() in src/contrib/minizip/zip.c
1067 if ((zi-ci.pos_in_buffered_data0) (err==ZIP_OK))
1068 if (zipFlushWriteBuffer(zi)==ZIP_ERRNO)
1069 err = ZIP_ERRNO; /* 1. Here, setting ZIP_ERRNO to err */
1070
1071 if ((zi-ci.method == Z_DEFLATED) (!zi-ci.raw))
1072 {
1073 err=deflateEnd(zi-ci.stream); /* 2. BUG! overwriting
defalteEnd()'s return-value(ZIP_OK) to err */
1074 zi-ci.stream_initialised = 0;
1075 }
1076
** How to fix.
I have made a small patch that avoid to overwrite to err, when err has a
error code.
Would you merge my patch?
ndex: /zlib/branches/BUG-write-error/src/contrib/minizip/zip.c
===
--- /zlib/branches/BUG-write-error/src/contrib/minizip/zip.c (revision 537)
+++ /zlib/branches/BUG-write-error/src/contrib/minizip/zip.c (revision 566)
@@ -1071,5 +1071,6 @@
if ((zi-ci.method == Z_DEFLATED) (!zi-ci.raw))
{
-err=deflateEnd(zi-ci.stream);
+int tmperr=deflateEnd(zi-ci.stream);
+if (err==ZIP_OK) err = tmperr;
zi-ci.stream_initialised = 0;
}
From: xxx (Mark Adler)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 22:03:34 -0800
Subject: [Zlib-devel] Patch for losing a write error
Hiroshi,
Minizip is a contribution to zlib from Gilles Vollant. He is however
on this list, so he may respond.
Mark
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #7 from Zarko (grof) zarko.pin...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 08:40:57 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) The problem is not the license, but patents, because without patented codecs the me-tv application is useless. Okey, but where (or on which way) exactly Me TV uses (implements) patented codecs? Just I said earlier, all dependencies needed by this soft are from Fedora repo, not from RPM Fusion (except Xine itself, but I do not know yet, works Me TV without Xine RPM package or not). Are these codecs within the source, if they are why the author of upstream has not written copyright information? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 08:41:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Comment: the name of the executable is 'wannier90.x'. Not a blocker, but a little unusual. I don't want to break compatibility with upstream, so I'm keeping the name of the binary as is. (In reply to comment #4) wannier90-devel.i586: W: no-documentation It would be worth adding at least the license file to this package, I think. IMHO it's not needed, since the devel package requires the base package that contains the documentation along with the license. wannier90-libs.i586: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/libwannier.so You probably want to strip this one, although I guess this might break debuginfo. Merged this with the main package, as I made the executable link to the shared library. The warning was caused by find-debuginfo.sh not finding the non-executable library, it works now. wannier90-libs.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libwannier.so This is a consequence of upstream's peculiar build process. Persuade them to use libtool :-) Upstream builds a static library, I changed the makefile to build a shared library instead. (In reply to comment #5) Comment: Would be worth including the examples/ subdirectory from the source, particularly since it is mentioned in the README file. Done. http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/wannier90.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/wannier90-1.1-3.fc10.src.rpm rpmlint output: wannier90.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libwannier.so wannier90-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. These can be ignored, as mentioned above. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #14 from R P Herrold herr...@owlriver.com 2009-05-15 08:49:03 EDT --- I am technically not the upstream -- just the birddog and early packager, at owlriver ... please point to the URL upstream's DL link for Source0 http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/uml/zerofree-1.0.1.tgz -- Russ herrold -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #15 from R P Herrold herr...@owlriver.com 2009-05-15 08:51:06 EDT --- Thinking about it. you may also want to add the companion: http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/uml/sparsify.c to the package as well which adds some additional function on making a more slender FS -- Russ herrold -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500267] Pre-Review Request: maven-doxia-sitetools - Content generation framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500267 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 09:15:53 EDT --- Needed changes: - License should become ASL 2.0. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491616] Review Request: mingw32-zfstream - MinGW Windows C++ abstraction library for compressed and non-compressed file I/O
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491616 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Sailer t.sai...@alumni.ethz.ch 2009-05-15 09:14:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) I would suggest looking at the bug, as it might propagate to zfstream; Thanks for the report. zfstream is fine however, as it does not include minizip (anymore), but links to minizip provided by the zlib and mingw32-zlib packages. So this bug needs to be fixed in zlib (mingw32-zlib), then zfstream is automatically fixed, as it links dynamically to the minizip DLL / shared lib. Have you reported the bug against zlib and mingw32-zlib? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #8 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-05-15 09:17:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) (In reply to comment #6) The problem is not the license, but patents, because without patented codecs the me-tv application is useless. Okey, but where (or on which way) exactly Me TV uses (implements) patented codecs? Just I said earlier, all dependencies needed by this soft are from It either calls an external application (like Xine) or is linked with a library that does the decoding (ffmpeg via libxine, etc). You must have the backend to actually see anything and the backend decodes MPEG streams. Fedora repo, not from RPM Fusion (except Xine itself, but I do not know yet, works Me TV without Xine RPM package or not). Me-TV can be started without Xine, but cannot be used if using means watching the TV. Are these codecs within the source, if they are why the author of upstream has not written copyright information? Please read the discussion in my RPM Fusion review request referenced in comment #3 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #9 from Zarko (grof) zarko.pin...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 09:36:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) Me-TV can be started without Xine, but cannot be used if using means watching the TV. OK, that is something what I do not know yet... Bu if you sure, then it is a good reason why should not to be on Fedora repo. It's OK for me. I can packaged this for RPM Fusion, but there is a packager for this. The only problem is that packaging seems to be abandoned. (no changes from 2009-02-17) If there are problems with some engines inside Me TV please notify that all of them (excluding xine) are experimental! So what is your suggestion about this program? Do you want package Me-TV for Fedora's users? I want! According to this, there is my new SPEC and SRPM: http://wiki.open.hr/~zpintar/fedora10/SPECS/me-tv.spec http://wiki.open.hr/~zpintar/fedora10/SRPMS/me-tv-0.8.12-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501006] New: Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501006 Summary: Review Request: xine-ui - A skinned xlib-based gui for xine-lib Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jussi.leht...@iki.fi QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/xine-ui.spec SRPM URL: http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/xine-ui-0.99.5-7.fc10.src.rpm Upstream url: http://www.xine-project.org/ Description: xine-ui is the default GUI for xine-lib. rpmlint output is clean. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #10 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 09:41:08 EDT --- See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501006 for review of xine-ui (xine in rpmfusion). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500243] Pre-Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for XPath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500243 Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #4 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 09:51:21 EDT --- spot, can we get confirmation that .pom files are exempt from licensing and URL checks? This will be an issue for a lot of these 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 500268] Pre-Review Request: maven-plugin-tools - Maven Plugin Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500268 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 09:56:02 EDT --- Needed changes: - License should become ASL 2.0 - URL is wrong. Shoule be http://maven.apache.org/plugin-tools/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500243] Pre-Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for XPath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500243 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Flag|needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #5 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 09:55:15 EDT --- Just for clarification, is a POM equivalent to a spec file for java? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500246] Pre-Review Request: plexus-classworlds - Plexus Classworlds Classloader Framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500246 Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 09:56:51 EDT --- Thanks, Fernando. I'd still like to see some comments about the XML source files stating that they're only for building but that's a Review thing :) I'm okay with the latest SRPM for pre-review. I'm going to set the review flag but someone please change it if that is incorrect. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500243] Pre-Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for XPath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500243 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:05:28 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) Just for clarification, is a POM equivalent to a spec file for java? It's like a spec file for maven builds. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 --- Comment #11 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-05-15 10:14:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) (In reply to comment #8) Me-TV can be started without Xine, but cannot be used if using means watching the TV. OK, that is something what I do not know yet... Bu if you sure, then it is a good reason why should not to be on Fedora repo. It's OK for me. I can packaged this for RPM Fusion, but there is a packager for this. I am the packager in RPM Fusion, but feel free to start a new review or takeover the existing 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 500243] Pre-Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for XPath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500243 --- Comment #7 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:14:42 EDT --- It would be nice if these were collected in a central upstream location, perhaps a git repo for java POMs. From a legal perspective, I doubt these are copyrightable works, unless they have much more complexity than Fernando has illustrated. So, for licensing purposes, I don't see any reason to worry about the POM 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 500269] Pre-Review Request: maven-embedder - Maven Embedder
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500269 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:16:03 EDT --- Changes needed: - Instructions for generating Source0 are not full - License should become ASL 2.0 - Better description will help. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500270] Pre-Review Request: maven-enforcer-rule-api - Generic interfaces needed by maven-enforcer-plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500270 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:22:21 EDT --- Changes needed: - License should be ASL 2.0 - at least this is the license in the headers of the source 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 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 --- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:24:05 EDT --- OK, I checked the updated package, and this now looks good. -- APPROVED by rjones -- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |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 500270] Pre-Review Request: maven-enforcer-rule-api - Generic interfaces needed by maven-enforcer-plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500270 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501017] New: Review Request: libtnc - Library implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libtnc - Library implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) specification https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501017 Summary: Review Request: libtnc - Library implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) specification Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tcall...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/libtnc.spec SRPM URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/libtnc-1.19-1.fc11.src.rpm Koji Scratch Build (dist-f11): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1356162 Description: This library provides functions for loading and interfacing with loadable IMC Integrity Measurement Collector (IMC) and Integrity Measurement Verifier (IMV) modules as required by the Trusted Network Computing (TNC) IF-IMC and IF-IMV interfaces as described in: https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/specs/TNC -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500243] Pre-Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for XPath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500243 Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:25:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) It would be nice if these were collected in a central upstream location, perhaps a git repo for java POMs. I *think* (this is from hearsay) that they're all in the maven's repo upstream. But I really have no idea. So, for licensing purposes, I don't see any reason to worry about the POM files. Thanks. Pre-review is approved 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 500271] Pre-Review Request: maven-archiver - Maven Archiver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500271 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:27:54 EDT --- Needed changes: - License should become ASL 2.0. This is what's in the source 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 500251] Pre-Review Request: dumbster - Fake SMTP Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500251 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:31:01 EDT --- After spot's comments on another bug about .pom files being exempt from licensing due to their simplicity, I think the only thing necessary is the license change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496880] Review Request: wannier90 - Maximally-localised Wannier functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496880 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 10:28:41 EDT --- Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: wannier90 Short Description: Maximally-localised Wannier functions Owners: jussilehtola Branches: F-10 F-11 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 500252] Pre-Review Request: plexus-mail-sender - Plexus Archiver Component
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500252 Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #4 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:31:44 EDT --- spot, if you have a sec, please comment on comment #2 from Jerry. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500259] Pre-Review Request: javacvs - Netbeans CVS module and library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500259 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:33:17 EDT --- I forgot to post a link to the licensing table: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #16 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:38:14 EDT --- Given Russ herrold's comments above, I have prepared a new package. This package changes the upstream URL (and removes the whole unpacking-the-SRPM thing). More importantly it also includes the sparsify program. I'll leave it up to you (Jussi) whether you want to reopen the review of this package. Here it is: Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/zerofree-1.0.1-5.fc11.src.rpm rpmlint is still clean. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #17 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 10:48:39 EDT --- No, the package is fine as it is; sparsify is also under GPL+ and doesn't raise any other issues. What's up with the changelog, though? You've merged all of the changes of the interstitial specs together? Please, keep a full changelog. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #18 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:52:06 EDT --- Ah I was just keeping them all under the same date heading, but I can split them out if you like / in future. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500252] Pre-Review Request: plexus-mail-sender - Plexus Archiver Component
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500252 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) Flag|needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #5 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 10:49:16 EDT --- Ask upstream. If you can't get an answer from them, either drop the file or the package entirely. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500922] Review Request: zerofree - Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500922 --- Comment #19 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 11:16:13 EDT --- Copied the CVS request down here to make it easier to find: New Package CVS Request === Package Name: zerofree Short Description: Utility to force unused ext2 inodes and blocks to zero Owners: rjones Branches: F-10 F-11 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 498748] Review Request: rpmdepsize - A tool for visualizing RPM dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498748 Guido Grazioli guido.grazi...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |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 498748] Review Request: rpmdepsize - A tool for visualizing RPM dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498748 --- Comment #3 from Guido Grazioli guido.grazi...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 11:20:36 EDT --- Latest koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1356256 Note: for the next version you could consider choosing a stock icon and maybe add MimeType to the desktop entry. This package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225988] Merge Review: libavc1394
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225988 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461484] Review Request: twin - Textmode window environment for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461484 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #22 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-15 11:25:54 EDT --- The license header is wrong, it should be just GPLv2+. The license header refers to the license of the compiled binary; even if the sources are under (GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and MIT and Public Domain and BSD) every license used is compatible with GPLv2+ which thus overrides everything. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498748] Review Request: rpmdepsize - A tool for visualizing RPM dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498748 --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 11:27:46 EDT --- Should I [upstream] be looking at any patches? It's also possible I can push this to an open, public repository if people are interested in making serious contributions and/or pushing the project in new directions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494199] Review Request: drascula-international - Subtitles for Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494199 --- Comment #5 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 11:38:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) The following items need to be addressed: 1. License seems to be called Revolution Software Freeware License (http://liberatedgames.org/licenses/Revolution_Software_Freeware_License.txt). Does this affect the naming of the License in the spec? Is this GPLv2+ at all? When the license question is cleared out I will approve this package. Hmm, I've no idea how I ended up with GPLv2+ in the license tag here, a copy and paste error probably, sorry. The correct license tag should be: License:Freely redistributable without restriction The license has been checked (for another Revolution_Software_Freeware_License game) and been ok-ed by Spot: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-November/msg00030.html Here is an updated version: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/drascula-international.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/drascula-international-1.0-2.fc11.src.rpm p.s. 1) Can you also review drascula-music please, after some discussion it was decided it is better to have the music in a separate package instead of having it in the main package, see bug 494197 2) How are things going with the openttd open content 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 494197] Review Request: drascula-music - Background music for Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494197 --- Comment #4 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-05-15 11:38:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) drascula-audio has been removed from main drascula package. Thanks, Felix can you continue / restart the review then please ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
