[Bug 504077] Review Request: gnusim8085 - Intel 8085 assembly language simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504077
--- Comment #7 from Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury sherry...@gmail.com
2009-06-07 02:28:02 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
#1: can you give me your FAS username please ?
FAS username is sherry151
and apply for the packager status at
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/group/view/packager
done
Add the following line at the end of the %install
rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_docdir}
Can I not put this in the %clean section?
I made the suggested changes to the spec file and also some other changes
necessary.
#1 mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1 was necessary for building successfully
#2 %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz for packaging the man file
http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085.spec: Release 3 spec file
http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085-1.3.5-3.fc10.src.rpm: Release 3
SRPM
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504430] Review Request: healpy - A python wrapper of the healpix 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=504430
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 03:34:42
EDT ---
- The BRs are incorrect.
BuildRequires: python
should be
BuildRequires: python-devel
and
BuildRequires: gcc-c++
can be safely dropped (it's in the default buildroot).
?? The package uses BOTH python_sitearch AND python_sitelib?? (Are you building
on x86, then these will point to the same place?)
- Why on Earth do you
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/
mv %{buildroot}%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/data
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/data
as this will probably break functionality..?
- As the Healpix C++ package is included in the distribution, you need to find
a way to remove it and use healpix-c++-devel 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 504077] Review Request: gnusim8085 - Intel 8085 assembly language simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504077
--- Comment #8 from Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 04:50:08
EDT ---
#1: some typos in the description : stac and microproessor
I think the description should be:
GNUSim8085 is a graphical simulator for Intel 8085
microprocessor assembly language. It has many
features including a keypad which can be used
to write assembly language programs.
It also has stack, memory and port viewers which
can be used for debugging the programs.
#2: directory ownership
in %files
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/gnusim8085_icon.png
the directory %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/ should be owned by the package.
Hence
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/gnusim8085_icon.png
should be
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/
#3:
The package is ready. I have sponsored you.
Update the spec file and SRPM. I'll complete the 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 428567] Review Request: ETL - Extended Template 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=428567 --- Comment #76 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 05:09:08 EDT --- (In reply to comment #75) Lubomir etc, could you please review this alternate patch: http://patches.synfig.org/r/25/diff/#index_header Seems very well. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504456] New: Review Request: perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor - Name your accessors foo() and set_foo()
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor - Name your accessors foo() and set_foo() https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504456 Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor - Name your accessors foo() and set_foo() Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/MooseX-SemiAffordanceAcces sor OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor-0.03-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This module does not provide any methods. Simply loading it changes the default naming policy for the loading class so that accessors are separated into get and set methods. The get methods have the same name as the accessor, while set methods are prefixed with set_.If you define an attribute with a leading underscore, then the set method will start with _set_.If you explicitly set a reader or writer name when creating an attribute, then that attribute's naming scheme is left unchanged. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397614 Additional Comment: This is a BR of a new BR of the latest GA Catalyst::Devel. *rt-0.10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498723] Review Request: eZ Publish
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498723 --- Comment #5 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 05:12:55 EDT --- Merci, je suis le plus vite possible, et que j'ai également mise à jour de eZ Publish 4.1.2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498721] Review Request: php-ezc-Webdav - eZ Components Webdav
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498721 Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 05:10:13 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-ezc-Webdav Short Description: Set up and run your own WebDAV server Owners: llaumgui Branches: F-9 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 503847] Review Request: paperbox - A GTK tracker based document browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503847 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504430] Review Request: healpy - A python wrapper of the healpix 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=504430 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503256] Review Request: gtkmm-utils - C++ utility and widget library based on glibmm and gtkmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503256
--- Comment #32 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 05:24:14
EDT ---
- Fix the tabbing on the BuildRequires line.
rpmlint output:
gtkmm-utils.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/libgtkmm-utils.so.2.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
gtkmm-utils-example.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
gtkmm-utils-example.x86_64: W: no-documentation
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
- You will need to fix the rpath problem with
sed -i 's|^hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=.*|hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=|g'
libtool
sed -i 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' libtool
after %configure.
( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging /Guidelines#Removing_Rpath )
- Add comments to %install phase, e.g.
%install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL=install -p
find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -exec rm -f {} ';'
# Remove object files from examples going into %doc
rm -rf examples/.deps/ examples/.libs examples/*.o examples/Makefile*
# Fix incorrect permissions
chmod 755 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT{_libdir}/*.so.*
# Install compiled examples into %{_libdir}/%{name}
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/%{name}/
mv examples/{logging,multi-completion,tiles-simple}
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/%{name}/
- Put the examples/ in the %doc of the -examples package, not in -devel.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503256] Review Request: gtkmm-utils - C++ utility and widget library based on glibmm and gtkmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503256 --- Comment #33 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 05:29:52 EDT --- - Drop HACKING from %doc, it's related to compilation. - You are missing BuildRequires: graphviz since sh: dot: command not found Problems running dot: exit code=127, command='dot', arguments='classGtk_1_1EventBox__inherit__graph.dot -Tpng -o classGtk_1_1EventBox__inherit__graph.png' - The doc package is quite small (82K), I'd put the documentation in -devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503256] Review Request: gtkmm-utils - C++ utility and widget library based on glibmm and gtkmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503256
--- Comment #34 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 05:40:20
EDT ---
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. NEEDSWORK
- %install phase needs comments and can be cleaned up, see above.
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 is LGPLv2+ not LGPLv3. (see source code headers)
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. NA
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. NEEDSWORK
- The current contents of the %doc package
%{_datadir}/doc/gtkmm-utils/html
is not OK since
a) nothing would own %{_datadir}/doc/gtkmm-utils/
b) the packages would have different documentation directories. Listing files
as %doc puts them into %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-%{version}.
You will need to
rm -rf {_datadir}/doc/gtkmm-utils
at the end of the install phase and just list the documentation as
%doc docs/html/*
Get rid of the -doc package and put this in -devel since it's small in size.
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. NEEDSWORK
- Documentation is not large, I wouldn't put it in -doc.
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. NEEDSWORK
- Drop HACKING, it's not relevant.
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. OK
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. OK
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK
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. OK
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 503256] Review Request: gtkmm-utils - C++ utility and widget library based on glibmm and gtkmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503256 --- Comment #35 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 05:43:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) rpmlint output: gtkmm-utils.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgtkmm-utils.so.2.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] gtkmm-utils-example.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib gtkmm-utils-example.x86_64: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. The example warning is caused by the files not being actually executables; they are placeholders that need to be replaced by executables by make install. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503256] Review Request: gtkmm-utils - C++ utility and widget library based on glibmm and gtkmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503256
--- Comment #36 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 05:44:21
EDT ---
Also, on second thought: I think it's better to place the example binaries in
%{_bindir} and just rename them, say: tiles-simple - gtkmm-utils-tiles-simple
and so on.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495412] Review Request: flamerobin - Graphical client for Firebird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495412
--- Comment #16 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 06:28:46
EDT ---
Notes:
* Use full patch for Source0:
http://dfn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/flamerobin/flamerobin-0.9.2-src.tar.gz
* remove --mandir explicit parameter passing (%configure already makes it)
* change %makeinstall to make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
* this line is not needed at all mkdir -p
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications
Other things looks sane. Here is a koji scratch build withall these changes:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397625
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 --- Comment #35 from Hongli Lai hongli...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 07:13:59 EDT --- Also, could you wait for the 2.2.3 release, which is scheduled for next week? *A lot* of bugs have been fixed in this release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 Hongli Lai hongli...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hongli...@gmail.com --- Comment #34 from Hongli Lai hongli...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 07:12:47 EDT --- Hi Mamoru. I am one of the authors of Phusion Passenger, and I want to comment on several issues here: == Vendoring Boost We actually use a modified version of Boost, so Phusion Passenger will not compile against a stock Boost. I understand your concerns with regard to security, but please rest assured because we fully understand the security implications of vendoring a library. We will take full responsibilities for any security problems; that is, we will either backport security fixes or upgrade our vendored Boost to a newer version. I hope this addresses any concerns that you might have with regard to vendoring Boost. If not then I'm eager to hear your thoughts on it. == native_support.so I don't think the cp command there is correct. Phusion Passenger loads native_support.so by calling require 'phusion_passenger/native_support', so the file must be inside a 'phusion_passenger' directory. == -devel subpackage Phusion Passenger should not be split into a regular and a -devel subpackage. We do not provide developer headers or libraries. The source files in the ext subdirectory are not used during runtime, so they can be safely omitted from the RPMs. The lib subdirectory however must be present. == test subdirectory The test subdirectory contains unit tests and integration tests, and are only useful for Phusion Passenger developers, not for Phusion Passenger users. You can safely omit this subdirectory in the RPMs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504468] New: Review Request: rubygem-treetop - A Ruby-based text parsing and interpretation DSL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-treetop - A Ruby-based text parsing and interpretation DSL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504468 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-treetop - A Ruby-based text parsing and interpretation DSL Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-treetop.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-treetop-1.2.5-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Treetop is a language for describing languages. It helps you analyze syntax. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504470] New: Review Request: rubygem-syntax - Ruby library for performing simple syntax highlighting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-syntax - Ruby library for performing simple syntax highlighting https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504470 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-syntax - Ruby library for performing simple syntax highlighting Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-syntax.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-syntax-1.0.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Syntax is a lexical analysis framework. It supports pluggable syntax modules, and comes with modules for Ruby, XML, and YAML. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504473] New: Review Request: rubygem-rubigen - A framework to allow Ruby applications to generate file/folder stubs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubigen - A framework to allow Ruby applications to generate file/folder stubs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504473 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubigen - A framework to allow Ruby applications to generate file/folder stubs Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-rubigen.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-rubigen-1.5.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: A framework to allow Ruby applications to generate file/folder stubs (like the rails command does for Ruby on Rails, and the 'script/generate' command within a Rails application during development). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504471] New: Review Request: rubygem-sinatra - Ruby-based web application framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-sinatra - Ruby-based web application framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504471 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-sinatra - Ruby-based web application framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-sinatra.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-sinatra-0.9.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Sinatra is a DSL intended for quickly creating web-applications in Ruby with minimal effort. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504469] New: Review Request: rubygem-term-ansicolor - Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-term-ansicolor - Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504469 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-term-ansicolor - Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-term-ansicolor.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-term-ansicolor-1.0.3-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Small Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504479] New: Review Request: rubygem-cucumber - Tool to execute plain-text documents as functional tests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-cucumber - Tool to execute plain-text documents as functional tests https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504479 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-cucumber - Tool to execute plain-text documents as functional tests Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-cucumber.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-cucumber-0.3.10-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Cucumber lets software development teams describe how software should behave in plain text. The text is written in a business-readable domain-specific language and serves as documentation, automated tests and development-aid. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504474] New: Review Request: rubygem-rack-test - Simple testing API built on Rack
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rack-test - Simple testing API built on Rack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504474 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rack-test - Simple testing API built on Rack Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-rack-test.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-rack-test-0.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Rack::Test is a small, simple testing API for Rack apps. It can be used on its own or as a reusable starting point for Web frameworks and testing libraries to build on. Most of its initial functionality is an extraction of Merb 1.0's request helpers feature. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504476] New: Review Request: rubygem-newgem - Bundle Ruby libraries into a RubyGem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-newgem - Bundle Ruby libraries into a RubyGem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504476 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-newgem - Bundle Ruby libraries into a RubyGem Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.4.1-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Within this gem, you get one thing - newgem - an executable to create your own gems. Your new gems will include designated folders for Ruby code, test files, executables, and even a default website page for you to explain your project, and which instantly uploads to RubyForge website (which looks just like this one by default) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504478] New: Review Request: rubygem-diff-lcs - Provide a list of changes between two sequenced collections
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-diff-lcs - Provide a list of changes between two sequenced collections https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504478 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-diff-lcs - Provide a list of changes between two sequenced collections Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-diff-lcs.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-diff-lcs-1.1.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Diff::LCS is a port of Algorithm::Diff that uses the McIlroy-Hunt longest common subsequence (LCS) algorithm to compute intelligent differences between two sequenced enumerable containers. The implementation is based on Mario I. Wolczko's Smalltalk version (1.2, 1993) and Ned Konz's Perl version (Algorithm::Diff). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504472] New: Review Request: rubygem-shotgun - Automatic reloading version of the rackup command
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-shotgun - Automatic reloading version of the rackup command https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504472 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-shotgun - Automatic reloading version of the rackup command Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-shotgun.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-shotgun-0.3-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: This is an automatic reloading version of the rackup command that's shipped with Rack. It can be used as an alternative to the complex reloading logic provided by web frameworks or in environments that don't support application reloading. The shotgun command starts one of Rack's supported servers (e.g., mongrel, thin, webrick) and listens for requests but does not load any part of the actual application. Each time a request is received, it forks, loads the application in the child process, processes the request, and exits the child process. The result is clean, application-wide reloading of all source files and templates on each request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504480] New: Review Request: rubygem-configuration - Pure Ruby scoped configuration files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-configuration - Pure Ruby scoped configuration files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504480 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-configuration - Pure Ruby scoped configuration files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-configuration.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-configuration-0.0.5-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Ruby configuration gem provides a mechanism for configuring ruby programs with ruby configuration 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 504481] New: Review Request: rubygem-builder - Provide a simple way to create XML markup and data structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-builder - Provide a simple way to create XML markup and data structures https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504481 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-builder - Provide a simple way to create XML markup and data structures Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-builder.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-builder-2.1.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Builder provides a number of builder objects that make creating structured data simple to do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504475] New: Review Request: rubygem-polyglot - Allow hooking of language loaders for specified extensions into require
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-polyglot - Allow hooking of language loaders for specified extensions into require https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504475 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-polyglot - Allow hooking of language loaders for specified extensions into require Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-polyglot.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-polyglot-0.2.5-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: This Ruby GEM allows custom language loaders for specified file extensions to be hooked into require. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504477] New: Review Request: rubygem-launchy - Helper class for cross-platform launching of applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-launchy - Helper class for cross-platform launching of applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504477 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-launchy - Helper class for cross-platform launching of applications Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-launchy.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-launchy-0.3.3-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Launchy is helper class for launching cross-platform applications in a fire and forget manner. There are application concepts (browser, email client, etc) that are common across all platforms, and they may be launched differently on each platform. Launchy is here to make a common approach to launching external application from within ruby programs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504479] Review Request: rubygem-cucumber - Tool to execute plain-text documents as functional tests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504479 --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 07:57:35 EDT --- rubygem-cucumber.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/cucumber-0.3.10/examples/dos_line_endings/features/dos_line_endings.feature This file demonstrates CRLF handling, therefore is ok to have CRLF line endings. rubygem-cucumber.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/cucumber-0.3.10/rails_generators/cucumber/templates/cucumber 0644 This is ok as well -- it is a script template, has a shebang but should not be executable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504478] Review Request: rubygem-diff-lcs - Provide a list of changes between two sequenced collections
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504478 --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 07:58:53 EDT --- rubygem-diff-lcs.noarch: W: invalid-license Artistic This actual license is GPLv2+ or Ruby or Artistic which is indeed valid. I suspect rpmlint only recognizes Artistic in GPL+ or Artistic a.k.a. Perl license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504473] Review Request: rubygem-rubigen - A framework to allow Ruby applications to generate file/folder stubs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504473 --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 08:01:39 EDT --- rubygem-rubigen.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rubigen-1.5.2/.autotest Upstream seems to use this, I prefer not to deviate from them. rubygem-rubigen.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rubigen-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/application_generator/templates/bin 0644 Template for script, ok to have a shebang, should not be executable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504476] Review Request: rubygem-newgem - Bundle Ruby libraries into a RubyGem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504476 --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 08:00:43 EDT --- rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/app_generators/newgem/templates/script/console.erb 0644 rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/rubygems_generators/executable/templates/bin/app.rb.erb 0644 rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/newgem_generators/install_website/templates/script/txt2html 0644 Template of a script -- has a shebang but should not be executable. rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/website/version.js rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/app_generators/newgem_simple/templates/lib/templates.rb rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/website/version.txt I can't see how these could cause problem and prefer not to deviate from upstream, but will get rid of them if reviewer wishes so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504468] Review Request: rubygem-treetop - A Ruby-based text parsing and interpretation DSL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504468 --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 08:02:37 EDT --- Note for reviewer: feel free to review this (I'll be thankful), but please do not approve it yet; it is pending resolution of a licensing issue (see SPEC file for details). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504489] New: Review Request: proguard - Java class file shrinker, optimizer, obfuscator and preverifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: proguard - Java class file shrinker, optimizer, obfuscator and preverifier https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504489 Summary: Review Request: proguard - Java class file shrinker, optimizer, obfuscator and preverifier Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fkoo...@tuxed.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fkooman.fedorapeople.org/proguard/proguard.spec SRPM URL: http://fkooman.fedorapeople.org/proguard/proguard-4.3-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: ProGuard is a free Java class file shrinker, optimizer, obfuscator and preverifier. It detects and removes unused classes, fields, methods, and attributes. It optimizes bytecode and removes unused instructions. It renames the remaining classes, fields, and methods using short meaningless names. Finally, it preverifies the processed code for Java 6 or for Java Micro Edition. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499579] Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499579
--- Comment #2 from Christian Krause c...@plauener.de 2009-06-07 09:33:48
EDT ---
I've reviewed the package and it looks ok. There are only some minor and
uncritical issues:
* rpmlint: TODO
rpmlint SPECS/libxdg-basedir.spec SRPMS/libxdg-basedir-1.0.0-1.fc10.src.rpm
RPMS/i386/libxdg-basedir-*
libxdg-basedir.i386: W: no-documentation
libxdg-basedir-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
In general it is not a problem to have no documentation if
a package doesn't provide any. ;-) However, in this specific case
the package provides a doxygen API documentation (make doxygen-all).
It would be good if it could be added to the devel package.
* naming: OK
- name matches upstream
- spec file name matches package name
* sources: TODO
- e32bcfa772fb57e8e1acdf9616a8d567 libxdg-basedir-1.0.0.tar.gz
- sources matches upstream
- Source0 tag ok
- spectool -g works
- upstream version 1.0.1 was released a couple of weeks ago, please update to
the new version (according to upstream's git repo it looks like a minor
bug fix release)
* License: TODO
- License MIT acceptable
- License in spec file matches the actual license (MIT license header in
libxdg-basedir-1.0.0/src/basedir.c )
- No License file included, so there is no need to package it.
- It would be better if upstream would provide a license file. According to the
Review guidelines the packager is encouraged to query upstream to include it.
However this will not block the review.
* spec file written in English and legible: OK
* compilation: OK
- supports parallel build
- RPM_OPT_FLAGS are correctly used
- builds in mock (F10)
- builds in koji:
F10: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1394643
F11: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1394648
F12: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397616
* BuildRequires: OK
- no build requires are necessary
* locales handling: OK (n/a)
* ldconfig in %post and %postun: OK
* package owns all directories that it creates: TODO
- %{_libdkir}/pkgconfig is created, but not owned by libxdg-basedir-devel
- please add a Requires: pkgconfig to the devel package
* no files listed twice in %files: OK
* file permissions: OK
- %defattr used
- actual permissions in packages ok
* %clean section: OK
* macro usage: OK
* code vs. content: OK (only code)
* large documentation into subpackage: OK (n/a)
* header files in -devel subpackage: OK
* static libraries in -static package: OK (n/a)
* package containing *.pc files must Requires: pkgconfig: TODO (see above)
* *.so link in -devel package: OK
* - devel package requires base package using fully versioned dependency: OK
* packages must not contain *.la files: OK
* GUI applications must provide *.desktop file: OK (n/a)
* packages must not own files/dirs already owned by other packages: OK
* rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT at the beginning of %install: OK
* all filenames UTF-8: OK
* functional test: OK
- compiling the provided test applications
tests/testfind and tests/testdump
- test apps compile successfully and the reported directory names seem to be
meaningful
* debuginfo sub-package: OK
- non-empty
- debuginfo file works together with gdb
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] New: Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Tracker: Duplication of system libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Summary: Tracker: Duplication of system libraries Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Dup lication_of_system_libraries OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: These packages in Fedora are with internals Additional info: 1) #134 (Approval needed - zsync needs to ship internal zlib for rsync compatibility) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/134 2)http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/fedora-meeting/2009/fedora-meeting.2009-06-04-16.33.log.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||490140 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||495310 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490140] Review Request: zsync - Client-side implementation of the rsync algorithm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490140 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|495310 |504493 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504077] Review Request: gnusim8085 - Intel 8085 assembly language simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504077 --- Comment #9 from Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury sherry...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 10:25:55 EDT --- Updated the spec file and srpm. Following are the urls: http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085.spec: Release 4 spec file http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085-1.3.5-4.fc10.src.rpm: Release 4 SRPM I will be waiting for review completion. Thanks Rangeen Basu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504469] Review Request: rubygem-term-ansicolor - Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504469
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07
10:42:02 EDT ---
Some basic comments (please also consider to apply the following
comments to the rest of your rubygem related review requests).
- Use %global instead of %define:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Pure_Ruby_packages
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define
- Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 is missing
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines
And for consistency I recommend to add
BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8
- As you have already defined %geminstdir, please use it also at
%files and so on
- %geminstdir/[A-Z]* should be marked as %doc
- Please check if Rakefile or install.rb are needed for binary rpm.
-
# Examples are documentation
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/examples \
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version}
-
- Note that
-
$ gem contents term-ansicolor
-
expects that examples/ directory should be under %geminstdir.
While we allow (don't forbid) to delete some files listed in
$ gem contents gemname) if packagers think they are not needed,
I don't think moving examples/ directory under %gemdir/doc is
needed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||504497 Depends on|504497 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||504497 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504469] Review Request: rubygem-term-ansicolor - Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504469
--- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-06-07 11:00:25 EDT ---
Thanks for picking this up
(In reply to comment #1)
Some basic comments (please also consider to apply the following
comments to the rest of your rubygem related review requests).
- Use %global instead of %define:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Pure_Ruby_packages
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define
- Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 is missing
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines
And for consistency I recommend to add
BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8
- As you have already defined %geminstdir, please use it also at
%files and so on
- %geminstdir/[A-Z]* should be marked as %doc
Will fix. These four (and maybe others) will be common for most other rubygem
packages I have submitted today. I'm wondering if it would make sense if I
copied this to other reviews; or what can I do to prevent duplicate reviewer
work.
Also, this was all generated by gem2rpm, we probably should fix the tool as
well.
- Please check if Rakefile or install.rb are needed for binary rpm.
Will do.
-
# Examples are documentation
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/examples \
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version}
-
- Note that
-
$ gem contents term-ansicolor
-
expects that examples/ directory should be under %geminstdir.
While we allow (don't forbid) to delete some files listed in
$ gem contents gemname) if packagers think they are not needed,
I don't think moving examples/ directory under %gemdir/doc is
needed.
Will revert. This applies to more packages I submitted today as well.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504469] Review Request: rubygem-term-ansicolor - Ruby library that colors strings using ANSI escape sequences
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504469 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07 11:06:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Thanks for picking this up (In reply to comment #1) Some basic comments (please also consider to apply the following comments to the rest of your rubygem related review requests). snip Will fix. These four (and maybe others) will be common for most other rubygem packages I have submitted today. I'm wondering if it would make sense if I copied this to other reviews; or what can I do to prevent duplicate reviewer work. I think you can just modify your rest srpm and don't have to copy my comments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a.bad...@gmail.com --- Comment #36 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07 11:03:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #34) == Vendoring Boost We actually use a modified version of Boost, so Phusion Passenger will not compile against a stock Boost. I understand your concerns with regard to security, but please rest assured because we fully understand the security implications of vendoring a library. We will take full responsibilities for any security problems; that is, we will either backport security fixes or upgrade our vendored Boost to a newer version. I hope this addresses any concerns that you might have with regard to vendoring Boost. If not then I'm eager to hear your thoughts on it. CC-ing to Toshio. Would you comment on this issue? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504456] Review Request: perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor - Name your accessors foo() and set_foo()
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504456 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? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504430] Review Request: healpy - A python wrapper of the healpix 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=504430
--- Comment #3 from Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 11:53:58
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
- The BRs are incorrect.
BuildRequires: python
should be
BuildRequires: python-devel
Sorry if I made a mistake here, but the packaging guidelines for Python state
to use python, not python-devel:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python
?? The package uses BOTH python_sitearch AND python_sitelib?? (Are you
building
on x86, then these will point to the same place?)
Again, sorry if this was a mistake, this package has C/C++ libraries and the
above guidelines seem to suggest you use python_sitelib for normal Python
modules and python_sitearch for libraries (like those written in C).
I've never dealt with a Python program with these kind of libraries before so I
got confused.
- Why on Earth do you
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/
mv %{buildroot}%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/data
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/data
as this will probably break functionality..?
Because they are just example .fits files. However, I will put them back.
- As the Healpix C++ package is included in the distribution, you need to find
a way to remove it and use healpix-c++-devel instead.
Okay, I will do this and the other things.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504076] Review Request: libiodbc - iODBC Driver Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504076 Lorenzo Villani lvill...@binaryhelix.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||502227 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502227] Review Request: virtuoso-opensource - A high-performance object-relational SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502227
Lorenzo Villani lvill...@binaryhelix.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||504076
--- Comment #6 from Lorenzo Villani lvill...@binaryhelix.net 2009-06-07
12:22:55 EDT ---
#
# MUST ITEMS
#
-- rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
Status: *** FAIL ***
Additional comments: [lvill...@enterprise i386]$ rpmlint *.rpm
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 5.0.11
['5.0.11-1.fc11', '5.0.11-1']
virtuoso-opensource.i586: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/virtodbcu_r.so
virtodbcu_r.so
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/virtodbcu_r.so
e...@glibc_2.0
virtuoso-opensource.i586: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/virtodbcu.so virtodbcu.so
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/virtodbcu.so
e...@glibc_2.0
virtuoso-opensource.i586: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/virtodbc.so virtodbc.so
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/virtodbc.so
e...@glibc_2.0
virtuoso-opensource.i586: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/virtodbc_r.so
virtodbc_r.so
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/virtodbc_r.so
e...@glibc_2.0
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/var/lib/virtuoso/db/virtuoso.ini ../../..//etc/virtuoso/virtuoso.ini
virtuoso-opensource-apps.i586: W: no-documentation
virtuoso-opensource-conductor.noarch: W: no-documentation
virtuoso-opensource-utils.i586: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 9 warnings.
From the %changelog:
* Fri May 22 2009 Rex Dieter rdie...@fedoraproject.org 5.0.11
this should be 5.0.11-1
virtuoso-opensource.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/virtodbcu_r.so
e...@glibc_2.0
I don't know how to deal with that but I guess it can be ignored
virtuoso-opensource.i586: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/virtodbcu_r.so
virtodbcu_r.so
Kevin told me that this isn't a showstopper since these libraries should be
dlopened and not linked. However, I think it's better to ask upstream to move
these libraries off %_libdir
To sum up:
- The changelog issue must be fixed
- shared-lib-calls-exit - This is a problem in their code but I don't think
it's a showstopper
- invalid-soname - This is not a showstopper but ping upstream, if possible,
and ask them to change the path in a future release
- no-documentation in subpackages - Not a problem
-- The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
Status: PASS
-- The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
Status: PASS
-- The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
Status: PASS
-- The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
Status: PASS
Additional comments: Package license is GPL2 and the exemptions seems
acceptable to me.
-- The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
Status: PASS
-- If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
Status: PASS
-- The spec file must be written in American English.
Status: PASS
-- The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
Status: PASS
-- The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
Status: PASS
-- The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Status: PASS
Additional comments: The scratch build shows that it builds on all
supported architectures
-- If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
Status: PASS
-- All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
Status: PASS
-- The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using
[Bug 502525] Review Request: lazygal - static photo gallery generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502525 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07 12:40:53 EDT --- For 0.4.1-2: * BR (BuildRequires) - BR: python-devel instead of BR: python is needed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1395448 * Documents - Please consider to also add the following files as %doc: -- ChangeLog TODO -- * %changelog - I recommend to add one line between each %changelog entry (as this is useful when importing packages into Fedora CVS) like: -- * Mon May 25 2009 Byron Clark by...@theclarkfamily.name 0.4.1-2 - Fix typo in upstream URL. * Sun May 24 2009 Byron Clark by...@theclarkfamily.name 0.4.1-1 - Initial release -- * Misc rpmlint issue -- lazygal.src: W: strange-permission lazygal-0.4.1.tar.gz 0600 lazygal.src: W: strange-permission lazygal.spec 0600 -- - Please change the permission of files in srpm to 0644. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472696] Review Request: vcards-daemon - manage evolution contacts as vcards
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472696 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(leamas.a...@gmail ||.com) --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07 12:47:21 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 471575] Review Request: libnautilus-vcards - Nautilus vcard context menu extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471575 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(leamas.a...@gmail ||.com) --- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07 12:45:31 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 473046] Review Request: miniupnpc - command line tool to control NAT in UPnP-enabled routers as Linksys, D-Link etc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473046 --- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-06-07 12:48:45 EDT --- Again 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 504077] Review Request: gnusim8085 - Intel 8085 assembly language simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504077
--- Comment #10 from Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 12:47:37
EDT ---
- MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}
- MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package is licensed (GPL) with an open-source compatible license
and
meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- MUST: the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file,
then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is
included in %doc.
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible.
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
- MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least i386.
- MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires.
- MUST: The spec file handles locales properly.
- MUST: If the package does not contain shared library files located in the
dynamic linker's default paths
- MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable
- MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates.
- MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
- MUST: Permissions on files are set properly.
- MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section
of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content. This is described in
detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: There are no Large documentation files
- MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If
it
is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present.
- MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries
- MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix
- MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives
- MUST: Package containing GUI applications includes a %{name}.desktop file,
and
that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install
section.
- MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
SHOULD Items:
- SHOULD: The source package does include license text(s) as COPYING
- SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i386.
- SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
- SHOULD: No scriptlets were used, those scriptlets must be sane.
- SHOULD: No subpackages present.
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 504077] Review Request: gnusim8085 - Intel 8085 assembly language simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504077 --- Comment #11 from Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 12:50:54 EDT --- Read how to request CVS access https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-electronic-lab/ticket/19#comment:8 Also apply for the EL-5 branch and add me into the owners :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504077] Review Request: gnusim8085 - Intel 8085 assembly language simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504077 Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | 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 495412] Review Request: flamerobin - Graphical client for Firebird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495412 --- Comment #17 from Philippe Makowski makowski.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 14:56:48 EDT --- ok, changes made : Spec URL: http://ibphoenix.fr//fedora/flamerobin.spec koji scratch builds are ok : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397855 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397860 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397864 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 --- Comment #37 from Toshio Kuratomi tkura...@redhat.com 2009-06-07 16:08:02 EDT --- Short answer: vendoring or bundling of libraries is not allowed. Long answer: you can request an exception from FESCo but it's not likely to be granted with just the reasons you've given here. When you bundle a library and, on top of that, modify it so it no longer matches upstream, you are starting the process of forking the library. This may not seem like much of an issue to a developer. (Hey, I just have one or two forked libraries, no problem for me to track security issues.) But it makes life much more difficult for distributions. There are places that this shows up. * Security. You touched on the fact that you've heard the security arguments but I'll go ahead on specify them here since there's many different places that this touches: - When a security flaw is discovered in a library and bundling is not allowed, The library can be fixed in a single package, that package rebuilt, and when users download it, all the applications that use it are immediately protected. When bundling is allowed, the distribution has to find all the packages that the library occurs in by auditing source code or running a special tool over all elf files in all packages, then all of those packages have to be fixed, all of those packages have to be built, and users have to download and update each of the ones that they are using on their system before they are protected. There is much more work involved when bundled libraries are involved. - With security issues, people want to remove as much lag as they can between announcement of a problem and the fix being available for users. When libraries are unbundled, tools like vendor-sec can be used to alert distributions of problems that need patching in their packages before the announcement is made and then they can fix them with zero days of vulnerability. If bundling of libraries occurs, then the problem becomes how to get fixes out to all affected packages. If the distribution patches those packages, they must be careful to not leak the fact that there is a security vulnerability before they are allowed (which means they need to be careful who they share the information and what information they share with others). OTOH, if they do not patch the packages bundling libraries, then those packages are not protected on zero day, but only afterwards. - When a security flaw appears, the program has to either update to a non-affected version of the library or backport a fix. This can be problematic when the code of the library has undergone many API and code changes since the version that is being bundled and the security fixing patch is very widespread. Many conflicts can arise that need time to fix when trying to backport the fixes but porting the application code to the new API version can also take a lot of time. - We cannot implicitly trust an upstream application to be on top of security issues that are released in the packages that they care about. What happens if you are not following boost development and don't know that a security release has been made? What happens if the developer that is responsible for watching boost development goes on vacation or quits your project? What happens if your application ceases active development? What happens if boost stops active development and security fixes start originating with distro patches? * Forking is occurring. Once an application starts bundling libraries, it's easy for the project to include local patches to the library to add features that upstream doesn't have or fix bugs that upstream hasn't addressed. This has several negative effects. - When a security issue appears, it becomes harder to fix the application bundling the library. If you attempt to upgrade to a newer version, you have to make sure your important local modifications get ported to the new version. If you attempt to backport, you have to merge the upstream fix to your own code-base which may have conflicts with the local modifications. - When working with the library that comes from upstream, there is a community of people who are interested in that library to fall back on for help. When working on your own private copy that community may not be interested in helping you work on your modified sources since they don't have control or knowledge of what your modified sources do. - Forking dilutes one of the strengths of open-source development. Instead of a project getting stronger with more people supplying patches to help drive the project and build a bigger community, the community of people interested in it are splintering, developing more and more divergent code-bases, solving the same problem over and over in different ways in different private copies of the
[Bug 504521] New: Review Request: SevenZip - Java SDK for LZMA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: SevenZip - Java SDK for LZMA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504521
Summary: Review Request: SevenZip - Java SDK for LZMA
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: oget.fed...@gmail.com
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/SevenZip.spec
SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/SevenZip-4.65-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description:
SevenZip is the Java version of LZMA compressing and decompressing SDK.
rpmlint:
SevenZip.src:112: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package (main package)
%{_libdir}/gcj/%{name}/
This is a false warning since the package is not noarch by default.
Koji rawhide build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397876
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504521] Review Request: SevenZip - Java SDK for LZMA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504521 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||492203 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492203] Review Request: frinika - Music Workstation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492203 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||504521 Bug 492203 depends on bug 491581, which changed state. Bug 491581 Summary: Review Request: jVorbisEnc - Pure Java Ogg Vorbis Encoder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491581 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Bug 492203 depends on bug 491578, which changed state. Bug 491578 Summary: Review Request: RasmusDSP - Embeddable Audio/MIDI processor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491578 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED --- Comment #2 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 16:27:43 EDT --- Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/frinika.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/frinika-0.5.1-3.521svn.fc11.src.rpm Changelog: 0.5.1-3.521svn - Update to svn revision 521 - Remove the bundled copy of SevenZip. Require Fedora's SevenZip 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 504524] New: Review Request: perl-SQL-Shell - Command interpreter for DBI shells
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-SQL-Shell - Command interpreter for DBI shells Alias: perl-SQL-Shell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504524 Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Shell - Command interpreter for DBI shells Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/SQL-Shell OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-SQL-Shell.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-SQL-Shell-1.14-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: SQL::Shell is a command-interpreter API for building shells and batch scripts. A command-line interface with readline support is included as part of the CPAN distribution. See SQL::Shell::Manual for a user guide. SQL::Shell offers features similar to the mysql or sql*plus client programs but is database independent. This package provides the backend SQL::Shell libraries. For the command-line interperter (sqlsh), please also install the sqlsh package. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397935 *rt-0.10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502978] Review Request: python-line_profiler - A Python line-by-line profiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502978 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-06-07 16:52:05 EDT --- python-line_profiler-1.0-0.3.b2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-line_profiler-1.0-0.3.b2.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jkeat...@redhat.com, ||ka...@redhat.com Component|Package Review |distribution AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nott...@redhat.com QAContact|extras...@fedoraproject.org |nott...@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 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added QAContact|nott...@redhat.com |extras...@fedoraproject.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502978] Review Request: python-line_profiler - A Python line-by-line profiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502978 Silas Sewell si...@sewell.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #9 from Silas Sewell si...@sewell.ch 2009-06-07 16:55:20 EDT --- Built. Thanks Parag and Jason. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 --- Comment #38 from Hongli Lai hongli...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 16:57:35 EDT --- Toshio, I totally understand your points. We are well aware of all of those disadvantages of bundling/forking that you mentioned, but given our circumstances we decided that bundling/forking Boost is the best solution, despite all the aforementioned disadvantages. We made this decision a year ago, and to date we still think that it's the right decision. Regarding responsibility: what I meant is that we take security very seriously, and that we will do our best to address any security problems, including those in Boost, as opposed to neglecting Boost security issues and happily keeping on vendoring the old, insecure version. We treat any problems in Boost as if they are problems in our own code. Is this explanation sufficient for you? If not, what are your concerns? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496433] Tracker: packages from Russian Fedora Remix
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496433 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jkeat...@redhat.com, ||ka...@redhat.com Component|Package Review |distribution AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Bug 496433 depends on bug 497719, which changed state. Bug 497719 Summary: Update to the 1.9.x branch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497719 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504493] Tracker: Duplication of system libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504493 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-package-rev...@redha | |t.com, jkeat...@redhat.com, | |ka...@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 226430] Merge Review: squashfs-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=226430 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@christoph-wickert.de --- Comment #8 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-06-07 17:09:02 EDT --- Would you mind adding a disttag in the next build? TIA. -- 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 504430] Review Request: healpy - A python wrapper of the healpix 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=504430 --- Comment #4 from Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 17:13:55 EDT --- Okay, first of all I forgot to thank you for the review. I've patched the source so it doesn't build the Healpix-c++ package and also so that it links against the healpix-c++ and cfitsio libraries already in Fedora. I also think I have corrected the other mistakes you mentioned, unless I misunderstood. Thanks again. The new files are here with no change to rpmlint. Spec URL: http://jsmidt.fedorapeople.org/healpy.spec SRPM URL: http://jsmidt.fedorapeople.org/healpy-0.9.6-1.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504076] Review Request: libiodbc - iODBC Driver Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504076 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #11 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-06-07 17:34:24 EDT --- imported, built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502227] Review Request: virtuoso-opensource - A high-performance object-relational SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502227 Bug 502227 depends on bug 504076, which changed state. Bug 504076 Summary: Review Request: libiodbc - iODBC Driver Manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504076 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502227] Review Request: virtuoso-opensource - A high-performance object-relational SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502227 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-06-07 17:43:57 EDT --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/virtuoso-opensource/virtuoso-opensource.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/virtuoso-opensource/virtuoso-opensource-5.0.11-2.src.rpm * Sun Jun 07 2009 Rex Dieter rdie...@fedoraproject.org 5.0.11-2 - omit remaining .la files - fix %%changelog - fix virtuoso.ini dangling symlink -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504489] Review Request: proguard - Java class file shrinker, optimizer, obfuscator and preverifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504489
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07
18:08:26 EDT ---
Here are my notes for this package:
- rpmlint is silent.
- koji rawhide build seems fine
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397983
! Please explain in the specfile as comments what Sources 1-3 are for.
! Not a blocker, but in the docs/ and examples/ directories, there are html,
xml and pro files that refer to /usr/local/. You might want to fix them.
? Any reason why you don't put the jar files directly in /usr/share/java/ ? If
you definitely need to put the jar files in /usr/share/java/proguard/ , can you
replace
%{_javadir}/%{name}*
with
%{_javadir}/%{name}/
in %files to indicate that this is a directory?
* If a package contains a GUI application, then it needs to also include a
properly installed .desktop file. Please follow
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files
and
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets
! You need to specify a specific java version in BR and R. See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#BuildRequires_and_Requires
In your case this ought to be 1.5
* GCJ AOT bits SHOULD be built and included in packages. Since this package
builds with java 1.5, this will bring great performance improvements on ppc*
architectures. Please follow:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines
Can you review my package (bug #504521 )? It is java too.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504430] Review Request: healpy - A python wrapper of the healpix 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=504430
--- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-06-07 18:17:25
EDT ---
- You have
BuildRequires: healpix-c++-devel
BuildRequires: cfitsio-devel
so
BuildRequires: healpix-c++
BuildRequires: cfitsio
is redundant (these are pulled in by the -devel packages).
- You are not building in %build. Use
python setup.py build
in %build and
python setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root %{buildroot}
in %install.
- Without looking at its contents, INSTALL shouldn't probably be in %doc (if
its only contents is instructions for installation from source, then it
shouldn't be included).
- You must in any case own the directory
%{python_sitearch}/%{name}/
so you can drop the three last lines from the %files section.
- Add comment about the patch. Also, you could remove the internal healpix and
cfitsio libraries from the extracted tarball in the setup phase so that one can
be sure that they are not used instead of the Fedora 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 504430] Review Request: healpy - A python wrapper of the healpix 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=504430
--- Comment #6 from Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 20:00:27
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
- You have
BuildRequires: healpix-c++-devel
BuildRequires: cfitsio-devel
so
BuildRequires: healpix-c++
BuildRequires: cfitsio
is redundant (these are pulled in by the -devel packages).
I meant:
Requires: healpix-c++
Requires: cfitsio
so I believe this is now fixed.
- You are not building in %build. Use
python setup.py build
in %build and
python setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root %{buildroot}
in %install.
Done
- Without looking at its contents, INSTALL shouldn't probably be in %doc (if
its only contents is instructions for installation from source, then it
shouldn't be included).
Done
- You must in any case own the directory
%{python_sitearch}/%{name}/
so you can drop the three last lines from the %files section.
Done. I believe I did what you meant.
- Add comment about the patch.
Done.
Also, you could remove the internal healpix and
cfitsio libraries from the extracted tarball in the setup phase so that one
can
be sure that they are not used instead of the Fedora packages.
Done. I have removed the entire directory containing the healpix and cfitsio
libraries in the setup phase.
The new files are again at:
Spec URL: http://jsmidt.fedorapeople.org/healpy.spec
SRPM URL: http://jsmidt.fedorapeople.org/healpy-0.9.6-1.fc10.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492203] Review Request: frinika - Music Workstation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492203 Bug 492203 depends on bug 492197, which changed state. Bug 492197 Summary: Review Request: toot2 - Java models and frameworks for Audio/MIDI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492197 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492197] Review Request: toot2 - Java models and frameworks for Audio/MIDI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492197 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #11 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 21:20:29 EDT --- Package built in rawhide, also in F-11, F-10 and F-9. Thanks everyone. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492201] Review Request: tootaudioservers - Toot2 Audio 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=492201 --- Comment #3 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 21:21:34 EDT --- Builds in koji rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1398081 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492201] Review Request: tootaudioservers - Toot2 Audio 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=492201 Bug 492201 depends on bug 492197, which changed state. Bug 492197 Summary: Review Request: toot2 - Java models and frameworks for Audio/MIDI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492197 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426752 --- Comment #9 from Zach Oglesby oglesb...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 21:32:19 EDT --- Updated http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.2-2.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 426750] Review Request: ghc-utf8-string - Support reading and writing UTF8 Strings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426750 --- Comment #9 from Zach Oglesby oglesb...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 21:31:25 EDT --- http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-utf8-string-0.3.4-2.fc11.src.rpm http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-utf8-string.spec Here are the updates -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426754] Review Request: ghc-xmonad-contrib - Third party extensions for xmonad
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426754 --- Comment #10 from Zach Oglesby oglesb...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 21:34:37 EDT --- Here is my spec and srpm's maybe this can help things along. http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-xmonad-contrib.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-xmonad-contrib-0.8.1-2.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 460974] Review Request: xmobar - status bar for X
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460974 --- Comment #5 from Zach Oglesby oglesb...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 21:35:46 EDT --- Updated with cabal2spec-0.16 http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/xmobar.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/xmobar-0.9.2-2.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 225698] Merge Review: dmidecode
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225698
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mcla...@redhat.com,
||oget.fed...@gmail.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07
23:14:52 EDT ---
I reviewed this package. It just needs very trivial fixes:
* rpmlint says
dmidecode.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dmidecode.src:11: E: buildprereq-use /usr/bin/aclocal /usr/bin/automake
/usr/bin/autoconf
dmidecode.src:13: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes kernel-utils
dmidecode.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 5)
dmidecode-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dmidecode.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
dmidecode.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided kernel-utils
These are all easy to fix. Use for instance
rpmlint -I buildprereq-use
to see what the complaint is about.
* The release tag is a mess. Can we continue with the usual convention?:
2%{?dist}
* Source0 must be full URL (with %{name} and %{version} macros)
- Buildroot is improper but it will be obsoleted soon so it's not a problem.
* We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-)
* Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported,
this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment.
I added mclasen to the CC since he made the last known build. Sorry if this was
not desired.
--
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 497766] Review Request: paintdotnet - A mono port of the Paint.NET image editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497766 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review- --- Comment #18 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-07 23:33:09 EDT --- Well. The package is sent to rpmfusion. Until someone steps forward and does the icon set matching, this cannot go to Fedora. Closing the bug WONTFIX. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481701] Review Request: python-TraitsGUI - Traits-capable windowing 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=481701 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481701] Review Request: python-TraitsGUI - Traits-capable windowing 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=481701 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #8 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-06-08 00:03:24 EDT --- Thanks. Now we have the rpmlints: python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/images/image_LICENSE.txt python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/images/image_LICENSE.txt python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/blue_view.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/red_view.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/black_view.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/green_view.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/person.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/example_workbench_window.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/dock/images/image_LICENSE.txt python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/example_workbench.py python-TraitsGUI.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4/examples/workbench/yellow_view.py When these are fixed, the package is good to go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503590] Review Request: python-tgext-admin - Admin Controller add-on for basic TG identity model
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503590 --- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-06-08 00:10:21 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 504544] New: Review Request: perl-Linux-Inotify2 - Scalable directory/file change notification
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-Linux-Inotify2 - Scalable directory/file change notification Alias: perl-Linux-Inotify2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504544 Summary: Review Request: perl-Linux-Inotify2 - Scalable directory/file change notification Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Linux-Inotify2 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Linux-Inotify2.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Linux-Inotify2-1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This module implements an interface to the Linux 2.6.13+ Inotify file/directory change notification sytem. It has a number of advantages over the Linux::Inotify module: - it is portable (Linux::Inotify only works on x86) - the equivalent of fullname works correctly - it is better documented - it has callback-style interface, which is better suited for integration. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1398272 Additional Comment: This is a requirement of a new BR of the latest GA Catalyst::Devel. *rt-0.10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504524] Review Request: perl-SQL-Shell - Command interpreter for DBI shells
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504524 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 2009-06-08 00:24:55 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397935 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url a313e85c6e22eda8d8df1fdb835e5437ddab6225 SQL-Shell-1.14.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=3, Tests=31, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.35 cusr 0.04 csys = 0.42 CPU) + Package perl-SQL-Shell-1.14-1.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(SQL::Shell) = 1.14 perl(SQL::Shell::Manual) = 1.6 perl(Tie::Rowset::InMemory) Requires: perl(Carp) perl(DBI) perl(File::Path) perl(IO::File) perl(URI::Escape) perl(constant) perl(strict) perl(vars) + Not a GUI application Should 1) Add following for subpackage sqlsh %defattr(-,root,root,-) 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 504456] Review Request: perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor - Name your accessors foo() and set_foo()
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504456 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-06-08 00:27:56 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1397614 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url c545632cf924e5733230beecc03b23e565b034c0 MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor-0.03.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=3, Tests=12, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr 0.01 sys + 0.19 cusr 0.04 csys = 0.25 CPU) + Package perl-MooseX-SemiAffordanceAccessor-0.03-1.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(MooseX::SemiAffordanceAccessor) = 0.03 perl(MooseX::SemiAffordanceAccessor::Role::Attribute) Requires: perl(Moose) = 0.55 perl(Moose::Exporter) perl(Moose::Role) perl(Moose::Util::MetaRole) perl(MooseX::SemiAffordanceAccessor::Role::Attribute) perl(strict) perl(warnings) + Not a GUI application 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 481701] Review Request: python-TraitsGUI - Traits-capable windowing 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=481701 --- Comment #9 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-06-08 00:28:19 EDT --- http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/python-TraitsGUI.spec http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4-3.fc10.src.rpm Updated -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504544] Review Request: perl-Linux-Inotify2 - Scalable directory/file change notification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504544 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 2009-06-08 00:36:52 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1398272 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url a4c62821471692abe60e8e91602b6b3bf140616c Linux-Inotify2-1.2.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=2, Tests=6, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.01 sys + 0.04 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.08 CPU) + Package perl-Linux-Inotify2-1.2-1.fc12.i586 = Provides: perl(Linux::Inotify2) = 1.2 perl(Linux::Inotify2::Event) perl(Linux::Inotify2::Watch) Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) perl(base) perl(Carp) perl(Fcntl) perl(Scalar::Util) rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) + Not a GUI application Should: 1) Ask upstream to add perl license text in source files itself as we don't count license information based on COPYING file. 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 504524] Review Request: perl-SQL-Shell - Command interpreter for DBI shells
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504524 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
