[Bug 516515] Review Request: globus-gfork - Globus Toolkit - GFork
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516515 Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se 2009-10-23 03:06:04 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: globus-gfork Short Description: Globus Toolkit - GFork Owners: ellert Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530190] Review Request: gdouros-aegyptus-fonts - A font for Egyptian hieroglyphs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530190 Robin Sonefors ozam...@flukkost.nu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Robin Sonefors ozam...@flukkost.nu 2009-10-23 03:31:08 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gdouros-aegyptus-fonts Short Description: A font for Egyptian hieroglyphs Owners: ozamosi Branches: F11 F12 InitialCC: fonts-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504405] Review Request: jaxodraw - A Java program for drawing Feynman diagrams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504405 --- Comment #15 from ltheu...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 03:38:21 EDT --- Hi, I am an upstream maintainer. I have never seen this test failure, but google showed me this: http://markmail.org/message/bcft5b5km7ihk3vp Could this be the reason, ie are you using open JDK? (officially we only support JaxoDraw with Sun JDK). PS I would also strongly recommend that the javadocs be packaged as well, for the benefit of potential plugin developers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225617] Merge Review: bitmap-fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225617 --- Comment #27 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-10-23 04:40:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #26) yeah, fc-scan is giving wrong o/p for console8*8 font family name, looks some problem. we dont a source file for console8*8 Well, your choices for that file are : 1. drop it, wait for complains, ask whoever complains to fix the file 2. write a fontforge (or other) script to fix the file yourself at build time 3. enhance fontconfig to read the real font name (assuming it is present at all in the font file) 4. remap the font name in a fontconfig rule (see the remapping-font-template). But this is still a workaround, not a complete solution, and you'll get nagged every time the font audit scripts run Continuing to deploy a file that does not work in fontconfig is not acceptable, that sends the wrong message to third-parties. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530205] Review Request: AntTweakBar - GUI library for videogame property editing UIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530205 --- Comment #3 from Sean Middleditch s...@middleditch.us 2009-10-23 05:05:04 EDT --- I don't believe the patch will break the Windows build, actually. I'm rather surprised that it builds in MSVC and not GCC by default, given my own experience with both compilers; usually it's GCC that pollutes the C++ namespace when you pull in random headers due to its reliance on C headers for implementing libstdc++ and MSVC that requires strict and proper C++ header inclusion. Go figure. :) I'll rename the patch files. I suppose the MingW trick could work, but I'm honestly more included to send the patch upstream as-is to make clearly point out the problem. The Makefile shouldn't be defining its own CXXFLAGS, it should use that name for the external configuration, and another name for internal variables. IMO, anyways. Granted, I'll probably just send upstream an entirely cleaned up Makefile in this case. There are some warnings generated during build I'd like to send him another patch for anyway, and a bug I need to track down (not a showstopper at all, just a little annoying thing with SDL keybindings and the ENTER key). I will add in the examples, not a big deal if you think it's preferable. I put them in the -devel package, since example source doesn't make a lot of sense in the main binary IMO. I copied the iconv thing right out of another example, but I'll fix it up to preserve the timestamp. :) http://middleditch.us/sean/fedora/AntTweakBar/AntTweakBar.spec http://middleditch.us/sean/fedora/AntTweakBar/AntTweakBar-1.13-3.fc12.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 530473] Review Request: lessfs - Lessfs is an inline data deduplicating filesystem.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530473 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 05:52:09 EDT --- Missing Requires: fuse -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485652] Review Request: navit - Car navigation system with routing engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485652 --- Comment #55 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 06:00:18 EDT --- Ping, Adam. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507585] Review Request: python-psi - Shows real time system information in python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507585 --- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 05:59:23 EDT --- Ping, again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503496] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-params - SBLIM params instrumentation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503496 Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 06:02:30 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sblim-cmpi-params Short Description: SBLIM Params Providers Owners: vcrhonek Branches: F-10 F-11 F-12 EL-4 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503510] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-sysfs - SBLIM sysfs instrumentation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503510 Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503482] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-nfsv4 - SBLIM nfsv4 instrumentation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503482 Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530473] Review Request: lessfs - Lessfs is an inline data deduplicating filesystem.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530473 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-10-23 06:03:35 EDT --- You're missing the URL. Also, run rpmlint since at least the summary is not fine (it ends with a dot). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530230] Review Request: plpa - Portable Linux Processor Affinity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530230
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-10-23 06:04:56
EDT ---
This looks potentially useful. Taking review.
PS. Change
%{_libdir}/libplpa.so.0
%{_libdir}/libplpa.so.0.0.0
to
%{_libdir}/libplpa.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 526651] Review Request: xpaint - An X Window System image editing or paint program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526651 --- Comment #29 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 06:10:54 EDT --- xpaint can be run without any included C code. However, a user can call the C script editor from the tab options, and then load and compile from the template tab, a filter, a surface, etc... Rpmlint gives us some guidelines, but there are several Fedora packages which produce dozen of warnings. I personally do not care if xpaint has a devel package or not. It is really better a single package with everything inside, though. Our role as packagers is secondary. We just need to ship a useful system. If we dislike some upstream decisions based on our packaging standards is not the main point, in my opinion. Xpaint is an old program, which was part of RedHat in the past. However, it has made some improvements along the time. According to the current developer: Versions = 2.8.4 include a new high performance postscript generator. The PS files are e.g. often less than 50% the size of the (already compressed) PS files that gimp produces, and the new thing is very fast - see enclosed 'ppmtops' prototype. I don't think there are so many open source programs, even among the very established ones, that are aware enough of these algorithms; of course 'ppmtops' relies on a combination of PNG predictors with LZW compression which had been patented till around 2004, so maybe it's the reason - if Adobe would provide better support for unpatented compression schemes as an alternative to LZW, one could do even better. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530205] Review Request: AntTweakBar - GUI library for videogame property editing UIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530205
Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|toms...@fedoraproject.org
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23
06:12:16 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I don't believe the patch will break the Windows build, actually. I'm rather
surprised that it builds in MSVC and not GCC by default, given my own
experience with both compilers; usually it's GCC that pollutes the C++
namespace when you pull in random headers due to its reliance on C headers for
implementing libstdc++ and MSVC that requires strict and proper C++ header
inclusion. Go figure. :)
Hmm, let me think about it… No I won't buy MSVC to try it ;)
I just wanted to make your patch only work for linux, as I don't know, what do
to on windows and it builded without it.
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on:
[] devel/i386
[] devel/x86_64
[] F11/i386
[x] F11/x86_64
[x] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint AntTweakBar.spec AntTweakBar-1.13-3.fc11.src.rpm
x86_64/AntTweakBar-*
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
//
[?] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
The license file says: If you use this software in a product, an
acknowledgment in the product documentation would be appreciated. and in the
official zlib says at the end appreciated but is not required., but this
should be the same…
//
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: zlib
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
Upstream source: 2c02dd71d0f86c62f022eed7e0bcb5b8
Build source:2c02dd71d0f86c62f022eed7e0bcb5b8
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
In the Source0 link is not a macro for the source version, when you sent the
patches upstream, you could ask for a rename to 1.13 so %{version} will match
this at the next release… Or use %global major 1 %global minor 13 as macros.
[x] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x] Package functions as described (no hardware to test with).
TwSimpleSDL works great.
[x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
Three
[Bug 530230] Review Request: plpa - Portable Linux Processor Affinity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530230 --- Comment #3 from Steve Traylen steve.tray...@cern.ch 2009-10-23 07:45:35 EDT --- http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/plpa/plpa-1.3.1-2.fc11.src.rpm http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/plpa/plpa.spec reflecting Comment #2 Steve -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502609] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-syslog - SBLIM syslog instrumentation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502609 Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(vcrho...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #2 from Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 08:29:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) [snip] Summary: Add shebangs to scripts' 1st line (/bin/sh) Fixed. Move devel files to -devel subpackage There should be no -devel subpackage. I also moved all libraries to the provider (cmpi) directory. Do not install binary files into /usr/share I suggest to make exception here - it's part of testing files and these are all in /usr/share/sblim-testsuite... Check CPL license CPL is fine. Why is GPL text in package? Don't know, it's probably upstream mistake. I checked it and I didn't find any GPL code, everything is under CPL. I removed COPYING file from the package, because it's misleading. URL tag is not valid. Fixed. Source tarball is not from upstream Fixed. Add rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to the start of %install section Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 523715] Review Request: logiweb - a system for electronic distribution of mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523715 --- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 09:58:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) even koji...cannot build this package due to memory shortage: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1742489 cc1: out of memory allocating 524284 bytes after a total of 1577832448 bytes I am new to the terminology, sorry. Does this mean that building from the source package causes a memory overflow? Is it correct that 'cc1: out of memory' comes from the C compiler? This means that koji build server got out of memory when compiling lgwam.c (in other words, koji build server does not have enough memory to compile lgwam.c) After building, running the program requires a machine with 2GB. I hope that is not a problem. Umm... then I cannot review this ticket (my machine does not have such large memory), I hope that some other reviewers have such machine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 513541] Review Request: cpulimit - CPU Usage Limiter for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513541 --- Comment #32 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-10-23 09:58:40 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 530473] Review Request: lessfs - Lessfs is an inline data deduplicating filesystem.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530473 --- Comment #3 from Adam Miller maxamill...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 10:03:02 EDT --- [08:59:26][a...@linos][specs]+ rpmlint lessfs.spec lessfs.spec: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 7, tab: line 1) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Fixed both mentions, complete oversight on my part. Spec URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/lessfs.spec SRPM URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/lessfs-0.7.5-4.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 491490] Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491490 --- Comment #11 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com 2009-10-23 10:07:46 EDT --- New report is at Bug 530568 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||528010 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530568] New: Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms
for Hidden Markov Models
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530568
Summary: Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures
and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: my...@yahoo.com
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora
SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/ghmm-3.spec
SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/ghmm-0.7-3.svn2286.fc10.src.rpm
Koji
F10:http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1764453
F11:http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1764433
F12:http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1764458
Original Bug report #491490 . Reopening as new owner.
--disable-static
The SPEC provides a static library subpackage. This would need to be removed,
and Having static libraries is kinda nice for some developer users.
--enable-atlas
Done.
You can export CFLAGS in the %configure line with
CFLAGS=${RPM_OPT_FLAGS} %configure --enable-gsl --enable-experimental
--enable-unsupported
Changed.
The build failure was my fault. I failed to upload the correct SRPM from the
x86_64 machine I was working, and instead uploaded an older version. So that
should be fixed.
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 528010] Review Request: PyMca - GUI for multi-channel analyser spectra visualization and analysis
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528010 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net Blocks||505154(FE-SCITECH) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491490] Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491490 D Haley my...@yahoo.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 515898] Review Request: imapfilter - A flexible client side mail filtering utility for IMAP servers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515898 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(dav...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 10:16:20 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 502614] Review Request: stfl - STFL implements a curses-based widget set for text terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502614 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #47 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 10:15:18 EDT --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503336] Review Request: newsbeuter - console based feed reader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503336 Bug 503336 depends on bug 502614, which changed state. Bug 502614 Summary: Review Request: stfl - STFL implements a curses-based widget set for text terminals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502614 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 524190] Review Request: flowcanvas - an interactive Gtkmm/ Gnomecanvasmm widget for “boxes and lines ” environments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524190 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(alibo...@gmail.co ||m) --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 10:18:26 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 459548] Review Request: php-gtk - GTK PHP 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=459548 --- Comment #30 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 10:20:31 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 504405] Review Request: jaxodraw - A Java program for drawing Feynman diagrams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504405 --- Comment #16 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-10-23 10:29:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) Hi, I am an upstream maintainer. I have never seen this test failure, but google showed me this: http://markmail.org/message/bcft5b5km7ihk3vp Could this be the reason, ie are you using open JDK? (officially we only support JaxoDraw with Sun JDK). Yes, Fedora uses OpenJDK. Added javadocs and test phase (which is disabled, though). http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/jaxodraw.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/jaxodraw-2.0.1-3.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225709] Merge Review: doxygen
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225709 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #2 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 10:30:25 EDT --- Some new/different rpmlint output (too long to copypaste, instead a summary): - configure-without-libdir-spec is ok, because the configure script doesn't support that. - summary-ended-with-dot A documentation system for C/C++. summary-ended-with-dot A GUI for creating and editing configuration files. - incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.6.1-1 ['1:1.6.1-1.fc13', '1:1.6.1-1'] epoch is missing in changelog - spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/doxygen-1.6.1/examples/page/html/* - doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/doxygen-1.6.1/examples/include/html/* find examples -type f | xargs chmod -x at the end of %build fixes this - file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/doxygen-1.6.1/LANGUAGE.HOWTO iconv --from=ISO-8859-1 --to=UTF-8 LANGUAGE.HOWTO LANGUAGE.HOWTO.new \ touch -r LANGUAGE.HOWTO LANGUAGE.HOWTO.new \ mv LANGUAGE.HOWTO.new LANGUAGE.HOWTO - wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/doc/doxygen-1.6.1/examples/tag/html/installdox perl Not in rpmlint: It would be better, if you split it examples and put them into a doc subpackage, because the most space of this package is consumed by examples, which the less people will watch. With splitting it's up to them to install them and other people to save space. -- 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 524190] Review Request: flowcanvas - an interactive Gtkmm/ Gnomecanvasmm widget for “boxes and lines ” environments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524190 Alexander alibo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(alibo...@gmail.co | |m) | --- Comment #5 from Alexander alibo...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 10:31:56 EDT --- I'm sorry, this is a lot of stuff for which I don't know where to start really and atm I'm trying to finish my bachelors which of course has priority. Maybe I'll look into this somewhere next month when I have time to really sit down for it. Thank you for pointing these things out though. It is quite difficult to get into this whole packaging business. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508750] Review Request: trash-cli - Command line interface to the freedesktop.org trashcan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508750 --- Comment #6 from Rahul Sundaram sunda...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 10:34:36 EDT --- Sorry for the delay. New upstream release: * Removed a couple of scripts * Changed URL's * Changed license tag I have retained the dos2unix stuff to keep it simple. Don't think there is any benefit to preserving timestamps in this case. Timestamp should match now Changed the docs Added a comment explaining the workaround for the man page stuff http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/trash-cli.spec http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/trash-cli-0.11.2-1.fc12.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 515898] Review Request: imapfilter - A flexible client side mail filtering utility for IMAP servers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515898 David Sommerseth dav...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(dav...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #14 from David Sommerseth dav...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 10:39:11 EDT --- Sorry! I've been quite busy lately and haven't had time to look into this yet. I've done a koji scratch build which looked good at first sight. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1747177 Unfortunately, I will be very busy the next two weeks or so, before I'll manage to continue. It's far from forgotten ... I just to complete some more urgent work first. I'll come back stronger as soon as possible! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530230] Review Request: plpa - Portable Linux Processor Affinity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530230
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||182235(FE-Legal)
--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-10-23 10:41:53
EDT ---
rpmlint output:
plpa-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate. OK
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
??
- The file src/libplpa/plpa_map.c has an odd license header [see bottom].
- Otherwise the files don't have license headers, attached LICENSE is a
3-clause BSD license.
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. N/A
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. OK
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. N/A
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. OK
- The main package requires the libs package anyway, so place all of the docs
in the lib package. (The lib package can be installed without the main package,
so the docs should be there.)
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'. N/A
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. OK
License header from src/libplpa/plpa_map.c:
License Agreement
Copyright (c) 2006, 2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in any form of this material and any product
thereof including software in source or binary forms, along with any
related documentation, with or without modification (this material),
is permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
+ Redistributions of source code of any software must retain the above
copyright notice and all terms of this license as part of the code.
+ Redistributions in binary form of any software must reproduce the
above copyright notice and all terms of this license in any related
documentation and/or other materials.
+ Neither the names nor trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. or
any copyright holders or contributors may be used to endorse or
promote products derived from this material without specific prior
written permission.
+ Notice about U.S. Government restricted rights: This material is
provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS. Use, duplication or disclosure by
the U.S. Government is subject to the full extent of restrictions set
forth in FAR52.227 and DFARS252.227 et seq., or any successor or
applicable regulations. Use of this material by the U.S. Government
constitutes acknowledgment of the proprietary rights of Advanced Micro
Devices, Inc.
and any copyright holders and contributors.
+ In no event shall anyone redistributing or accessing or using this
material commence or participate in any arbitration or legal action
relating to this material against Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. or any
copyright holders or contributors. The foregoing shall survive any
expiration or termination of this license or any agreement or access
or use related to this
[Bug 524238] Review Request: libclaw - C++ Library Absolutely Wonderful
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524238 --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-10-23 10:49:14 EDT --- Whoops, sorry SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/libclaw-1.5.4-3.fc12.src.rpm SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/libclaw.spec rpmlint silent now -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 513541] Review Request: cpulimit - CPU Usage Limiter for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513541 Ashay Humane ashay.hum...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ashay.hum...@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #33 from Ashay Humane ashay.hum...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 11:32:36 EDT --- Hi Fabian Sorry for the delay. I've been on vacation for a long time with no practical access to computers/internet. I've done one informal review so far. And created another package (adtool) I'll be back in a few weeks and continue... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504405] Review Request: jaxodraw - A Java program for drawing Feynman diagrams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504405 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2009-10-23 11:35:14 EDT --- Packaging looks good now. Approved. Jussi - you may want to file a bug with openjdk about the test failure, and you will obviously need to deal with the F-12 runtime failure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530090] Review Request: emacs-goodies - Miscellaneous add-ons for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530090 --- Comment #10 from Arun SAG saga...@gmail.com 2009-10-23 11:55:26 EDT --- Yes, build fails :) . Seems like a grave bug from upstream; He actually *seems* to be fixed it in previous release (30.7) http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=550225 But bug reappears(?) in 30.8; Will file a bug report there ASAP; Here is the link on how i reproduced the bug: http://sagarun.fedorapeople.org/misc/debianbug.txt ( error is in line 568) May be i should package the latest stable release? ( 29.3-2 ) -- 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 502614] Review Request: stfl - STFL implements a curses-based widget set for text terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502614 Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|503336 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503336] Review Request: newsbeuter - console based feed reader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503336 Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|502614 | --- Comment #9 from Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 12:16:54 EDT --- Ok, stfl (Newsbeuter dep) is in rawhide and i queued it for F-10 and F-11 already. Starting to work on that one now. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491490] Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491490 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Comment #12 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 12:22:15 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 530568 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530568] Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530568 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kon...@tylerc.org --- Comment #2 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 12:22:15 EDT --- *** Bug 491490 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 165689] Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=165689 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@jcomserv.net Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #49 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-10-23 12:22:43 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: squidGuard New Branches: EL-5 Owners: limb -- 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 530568] Review Request: ghmm - A library with data structures and algorithms for Hidden Markov Models
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530568
Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|toms...@fedoraproject.org
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23
12:21:56 EDT ---
Currently the tests are failing because the pythonpath are wrong...
with PYTHONPATH=$(PYTHONPATH)+:$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitearch}
LD_LIBRARY_PA TH=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/ghmm make check
it's a bit closer to success, but now there are IO warnings:
I/O warning : failed to load external entity /usr/share/ghmm/ghmm.dtd.1.0
.I/O warning : failed to load external entity /usr/share/ghmm/ghmm.dtd.1.0
I/O warning : failed to load external entity /usr/share/ghmm/ghmm.dtd.1.0
Don't know where they try to load that file. Maybe you have more luck ;)
About static libraries:
Ok, but in the guidelines stands In general, packagers are strongly encouraged
not to ship static libs unless a compelling reason exists.. Don't know, if
this is a blocker, I need to ask someone else ;)
You can export CFLAGS in the %configure line with
CFLAGS=${RPM_OPT_FLAGS} %configure --enable-gsl --enable-experimental
--enable-unsupported
Sorry, my fault %configure already exports exactly this CFLAGS, see:
$ rpm --eval %configure
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[!] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
It is in %{name}-3.spec (probably you won't upload it like this, just as a
backup solution, but anyway...).
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on:
[] devel/i386
[] devel/x86_64
[] F11/i386
[x] F11/x86_64
[] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint ghmm.spec ghmm-0.7-3.svn2286.fc11.src.rpm x86_64/ghmm-*
ghmm.spec:94: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %prep -e 's|$(PYTHON) setup.py
install.*$|$(PYTHON) setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root
${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}|' \
ghmm.src:94: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %prep -e 's|$(PYTHON) setup.py
install.*$|$(PYTHON) setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root
${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}|' \
ghmm.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libghmm.so.1.0.0
e...@glibc_2.2.5
ghmm.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/ghmm-0.7/AUTHORS
ghmm-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
ghmm-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings
- The buildroot-usage is ok, shared-lib-calls-exit is notified upstream as
stated in spec file.
- spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/ghmm-0.7/AUTHORS
- And AUTHORS is non-utf8, please convert…
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingTricks#Convert_encoding_to_UTF-8
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
Some files have no license header, upstream notified as stated in spec file
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: LGPLv2+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
Upstream source: 5ff2ec84ab3e3877724d332e86fdb88d
Build source:24d1829f2562d04115b7f028e0399f0f
But a full diff is clean, this results because the source needed to be
generated and timestamps could differ...
ok
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[!] Permissions on files are set properly.
see rpmlint output
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Large documentation files are in a -doc
[Bug 225709] Merge Review: doxygen
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225709 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|toms...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530230] Review Request: plpa - Portable Linux Processor Affinity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530230 --- Comment #5 from Steve Traylen steve.tray...@cern.ch 2009-10-23 14:19:01 EDT --- Looking around to understand about this license I noticed the released htop package contains a private and compiled in copy of plpa. http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/htop/0.8.3/2.fc12/data/logs/i686/build.log Regardless of if this accepted or not I'll submit a bug on htop following this. The bug for htop rather depends upon the resolution of this license item first though either way. htop is marked as GPL+ so something is definitely wrong. Steve -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530090] Review Request: emacs-goodies - Miscellaneous add-ons for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530090 Peter Galbraith p...@debian.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@debian.org --- Comment #11 from Peter Galbraith p...@debian.org 2009-10-23 14:22:36 EDT --- The defunx macro of session.el has caused me to stop shipping a pre-built version of the autoload file in the Debian package, because different flavours of Emacs would create different yet incompatible versions of the autoload file, in particular where that macro was concerned. Your compile.sh script runs when building the package. It builds the autoload file and byte-compiles the files using a single flavour of emacs. Do you ship only one flavour of Emacs? (e.g Emacs23) Your easiest solution would be to skip byte-compilation for session.el. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530230] Review Request: plpa - Portable Linux Processor Affinity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530230 --- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-10-23 14:25:08 EDT --- Good catch. Can you contact upstream to clarify the license issue? (Unless someone from legal OKs the license in comment #4.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503336] Review Request: newsbeuter - console based feed reader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503336 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 14:45:48 EDT --- (Just for info that you don't have to remove the tags for blocker bugs even if they are closed) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530230] Review Request: plpa - Portable Linux Processor Affinity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530230 --- Comment #7 from Steve Traylen steve.tray...@cern.ch 2009-10-23 14:45:47 EDT --- I'll wait on legal first. To me the license on plpa_map.c looks very similar to some of the examples on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD but needs signing of. With regards to upstream the license is clear in the files so at the moment it's not obvious they could offer extra information at this point. Steve -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 529605] Review Request: ohai - Profiles your system and emits JSON
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529605 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 14:43:58 EDT --- For now setting FE-Legal -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 529605] Review Request: ohai - Profiles your system and emits JSON
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529605 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-10-23 14:43:11 EDT --- Well, lib/ohai/mixin/command.rb is GPLv3+. Would you ask the upstream if this is intentional? The trouble is that this makes the whole ohai to be under GPLv3+ (ASL 2.0 and GPLv3+ are compatible). Then: * rubygem-json - GPLv2 or Ruby * rubygem-extlib - MIT * rubygem-systemu - GPLv2 or Ruby * ohai - GPLv3+ Since - GPLv2 and GPLv3+ are incompatible - Ruby and GPLv3+ are also incompatible according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing , currently ohai is under license conflict. if lib/ohai/mixin/command.rb is also changed to under ASL 2.0, license conflict can be resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530617] New: Review Request: libixp - Stand-alone client/server 9P library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libixp - Stand-alone client/server 9P library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530617 Summary: Review Request: libixp - Stand-alone client/server 9P library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libixp/libixp.spec SRPM URL: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libixp/libixp-0.5-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: libixp is a stand-alone client/server 9P library. libixp's server api is heavily based on that of Plan 9's lib9p. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530090] Review Request: emacs-goodies - Miscellaneous add-ons for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530090 --- Comment #12 from Peter Galbraith p...@debian.org 2009-10-23 15:17:03 EDT --- Just to clarify... This bug no longer occurs in Debian. There is something specific to your build method, which appears to be a pruned-down version of mine on Debian, causing it. Helping you won't be trivial as I don't know the fedora build and installation system supporting emacs packages. As the the `Package doesn't contains verbatin copy of the license text', I am no sure exactly what you want since the package is a collection of third-party files. Would adding the GPL-V2 and GPL-V3 files under the debian/ directory be enough? I wouldn't do anything with them in Debian, and of course lintian might complain. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530090] Review Request: emacs-goodies - Miscellaneous add-ons for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530090 --- Comment #13 from Peter Galbraith p...@debian.org 2009-10-23 15:33:11 EDT --- Also... you have not applied the patches under debian/patches, which must be done prior to building the autoload file (which itself would be better to do for each Emacs flavour upon installation rather than at build time). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486648] Review Request: simple-kiosk - Tools for creating a kiosk session
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486648
Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23
15:57:02 EDT ---
Urrrg, noarch package, that installs into /usr/lib64/ ?
But ./configure --libdir=%{_datadir} is as strange as this, but at least
makes more sense…
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE 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=508352 --- Comment #21 from Ed Swierk eswi...@aristanetworks.com 2009-10-23 16:37:08 EDT --- scott_coll...@dell.com responded on fedora-devel-list: I'll take it if that's ok. I'm new to packaging and looking for more experience. -Scott -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474012] Review Request: qodem - terminal emulator and communications package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474012 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #9 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 16:43:18 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) Are you already sponsored? I have not found you in FAS. I didn't found you, too and can't find an answer to the question in a comment above. Asking again: Are you already sponsored? (In reply to comment #6) It's been many months since the last comment with no response from the submitter; I'll close this ticket soon if there's no progress. There seems to be progress, but no release incremention... Your changelog from above is: %changelog * Sun Nov 30 2008 Jeff Gustafson jeffgus at, fedoraproject.org - 0.1.2-1 - Initial package creation After applying the patch you could write: %changelog * Sun Oct 4 2009 Jeff Gustafson jeffgus at, fedoraproject.org - 0.1.2-2 - patch for gettext * Sun Nov 30 2008 Jeff Gustafson jeffgus at, fedoraproject.org - 0.1.2-1 - Initial package creation Notice the version incremention from 0.1.2-1 to 0.1.2-2. And post *new* links to the uploaded spec and src.rpm... (In reply to comment #6) It's been many months since the last comment with no response from the submitter; I'll close this ticket soon if there's no progress. Some month later, soon starts again from now 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 530374] Review Request: nitrogen - A background browser and setter for X windows
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530374 Ionuț Arțăriși maple...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||maple...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Ionuț Arțăriși maple...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 16:41:33 EDT --- Hi! I'm not a packager and so I can't approve your package yet. Just trying to help with some tips. License: License of the code seems to be GPLv2, not GPLv2+. The license of the icons is a CC by-nc-nd which is unnacceptable for fedora: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Bad_Licenses_3 Missing BuildRequires(checked for by configure script): pkgconfig, gettext Check out: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ScriptletSnippets#GTK.2B_icon_cache for updating the icon cache. This package could probably use a .desktop file, too. It already has the icons. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|504405 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 504405] Review Request: jaxodraw - A Java program for drawing Feynman diagrams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504405 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|505154(FE-SCITECH) | Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #18 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-10-23 16:55:34 EDT --- Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: jaxodraw Short Description: A Java program for drawing Feynman diagrams Owners: jussilehtola Branches: F-11 F-12 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 464757] Review Request: openssl-tpm-engine - OpenSSL engine for TSS API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464757 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #7 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 16:55:51 EDT --- Here is a different build error: ./libtool: line 775: X--tag=CC: command not found ./libtool: line 808: libtool: ignoring unknown tag : command not found ./libtool: line 775: X--mode=compile: command not found ./libtool: line 925: *** Warning: inferring the mode of operation is deprecated.: command not found ./libtool: line 926: *** Future versions of Libtool will require --mode=MODE be specified.: command not found and many more... David, are you still working on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 526126] Review Request: python3 - Python 3.x (backwards incompatible version)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526126 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||530636(Python3F13) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530374] Review Request: nitrogen - A background browser and setter for X windows
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530374 --- Comment #2 from Sandro Mathys s...@sandro-mathys.ch 2009-10-23 18:30:57 EDT --- Hi Ionuț, Thanks for the tips :) Yea, I forgot the .desktop file...I recognized that soon after I uploaded the pkg but I already switched to 'lazy mode' by then ;) Uhm...I was pretty sure I saw GPLv2+ and not GPLv2 but I'll look at it again. About the icons' licensing...didn't notice that and will try to contact upstream about it. The missing BRs sound sane, will add them :) Updating the icon cache...yea, right. I should patch my own rpmlint or rpmbuild or something to always yell 'DON'T FORGET DESKTOP STUFF'...I really always forget about that stuff because I wouldn't miss them myself in daily use ;) Thanks again for those useful corrections :) You really should become a packager...you'd be the better maintainer than me with your first package already ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530649] Review Request: massxpert - Mass Spectrometry
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530649 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andreas.bierf...@lowlatency ||.de Blocks||501192 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530649] New: Review Request: massxpert - Mass Spectrometry
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: massxpert - Mass Spectrometry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530649
Summary: Review Request: massxpert - Mass Spectrometry
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: toms...@fedoraproject.org
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert.spec
SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert-2.0.7-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description:
This package contains the massxpert mass spectrometric software suite,
a software program that aims at letting users predict/analyze mass
spectrometric data on (bio)polymers.
URL: http://massxpert.org/
$ rpmlint massxpert.spec massxpert-2.0.7-1.fc11.src.rpm x86_64/massxpert-*
massxpert.spec:70: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/massxpert/
massxpert.src:70: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/massxpert/
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
Builds in koji dist-f13:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1765466
There *HAS* to be this hardcoded path, because on my 64bit system, this
programm will look anyway in /usr/lib/ subdir for plugins.
I notified upstream via mail for this.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470830] Review Request: open64 - The Open64 compiler suite (C, C++, Fortran)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470830 --- Comment #34 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2009-10-23 18:44:48 EDT --- We seem stalled here. Dominik, you still around? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530205] Review Request: AntTweakBar - GUI library for videogame property editing UIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530205 --- Comment #5 from Sean Middleditch s...@middleditch.us 2009-10-23 18:52:09 EDT --- MSVC Express is a free download. :p I still don't recommend using it if you can avoid it either way, though. Horrifically crappy development environment compared to vim. ;) I emailed upstream about the license discrepancy. In my totally non-legal opinion I don't see a problem with the slight difference in wording... but if upstream is non-responsive, what should I do to get this looked at and approved by the appropriate parties? 1) I'll replace with %global. I copied what I had there right out of a KDE package... which is the only place I could even find that option documented. I know it's not your fault at all, but I really have to express how immensely frustrating the documentation for Fedora packaging is. There've been a few cases I've copied code right out of the wiki and then told it didn't meet policy. :/ 2) There are comments above the patches in the spec file... I thought that's what the policy meant. Further expanded that patches have been mamiled. 3) My belief is that no extra Requires should be added at all. The examples are just example code, not part of anything you actually have to compile to use AntTweakBar. Further, the AntTweakBar.h header and API are explicitly designed to work independently of any mainloop. The SDL, GLUT, and GLFW examples are just examples of how to integrate with those mainloops, but the user can integrate with Allegro or GTK or Qt or anything else they want to use (so long as it provides an OpenGL context). You can easily write and compile code that links against AntTweakBar and some other toolkit that uses OpenGL internally without ever using any OpenGL header though, so even a requirement on OpenGL is not required to use AntTweakBar. It's fine the way it is, IMO. Updated spec and SRPM with the patch comments added and the %define-%global change made. http://middleditch.us/sean/fedora/AntTweakBar/AntTweakBar.spec http://middleditch.us/sean/fedora/AntTweakBar/AntTweakBar-1.13-4.fc12.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 464757] Review Request: openssl-tpm-engine - OpenSSL engine for TSS API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464757 --- Comment #8 from David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org 2009-10-23 18:56:11 EDT --- Ew, libtool. I think I'll rewrite it to use proper Makefiles instead. Yes, I'd still like this to go in. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487098] Review Request: Djblets - A collection of useful classes and functions for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487098 --- Comment #19 from Dan Young dyo...@mesd.k12.or.us 2009-10-23 19:06:21 EDT --- Updated spec with Comment #18 fixes: http://files.mesd.k12.or.us/~dyoung/reviewboard/python-djblets.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487098] Review Request: Djblets - A collection of useful classes and functions for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487098 Dan Young dyo...@mesd.k12.or.us changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Dan Young dyo...@mesd.k12.or.us 2009-10-23 19:07:10 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-djblets Short Description: A collection of useful classes and functions for Django Owners: dyoung dmalcolm Branches: F-11 F-12 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 530205] Review Request: AntTweakBar - GUI library for videogame property editing UIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530205 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 19:16:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) MSVC Express is a free download. :p I still don't recommend using it if you can avoid it either way, though. Horrifically crappy development environment compared to vim. ;) Yes, another vim lover ;) I emailed upstream about the license discrepancy. In my totally non-legal opinion I don't see a problem with the slight difference in wording... but if upstream is non-responsive, what should I do to get this looked at and approved by the appropriate parties? I don't believe this is a problem, just wanted to point to the difference. When they say nothing, it's the same as not requires. If they would like to require it, they should say it… 1) I'll replace with %global. OK 2) There are comments above the patches in the spec file... I thought that's what the policy meant. Further expanded that patches have been mamiled. That they have been mailed should be the what the policy meant. OK 3) My belief is that no extra Requires should be added at all. The examples are just example code, not part of anything you actually have to compile to use AntTweakBar. Further, the AntTweakBar.h header and API are explicitly designed to work independently of any mainloop. The SDL, GLUT, and GLFW examples are just examples of how to integrate with those mainloops, but the user can integrate with Allegro or GTK or Qt or anything else they want to use (so long as it provides an OpenGL context). You can easily write and compile code that links against AntTweakBar and some other toolkit that uses OpenGL internally without ever using any OpenGL header though, so even a requirement on OpenGL is not required to use AntTweakBar. It's fine the way it is, IMO. I found this argumentation in a bug elsewhere too. Even if it's sourcecode, it's just considered as documentation so the user sees from compiler errors (or needs to know) what to link. One last thing todo: Instead changelog: * Wed Oct 23 2009 Sean Middleditch s...@middleditch.us 1.13-4 - Use %global instead of %define write * Wed Oct 23 2009 Sean Middleditch s...@middleditch.us 1.13-4 - Use %%global instead of %%define - Note that patches have been sent to upstream. This way the macros are not expanded in the changelog (what you want here ;)) Do that and it's _ 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 526595] Review Request: zikula-module-filterutil - Pagesetter like filter rules for Zikula
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526595 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 19:19:58 EDT --- zikula-module-pagemaster-0.3.1-3.el5, zikula-module-filterutil-0-0.2.20090915svn15.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update zikula-module-pagemaster zikula-module-filterutil'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-0718 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 519483] Review Request: zikula-module-pagemaster - Creates pages with dynamic content like news, articles, 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=519483 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 19:20:03 EDT --- zikula-module-pagemaster-0.3.1-3.el5, zikula-module-filterutil-0-0.2.20090915svn15.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update zikula-module-pagemaster zikula-module-filterutil'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-0718 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 512016] Review Request: zikula-module-Polls - Simple voting system for Zikula
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512016 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 19:19:33 EDT --- zikula-module-Polls-2.0.2-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update zikula-module-Polls'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-0715 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 528892] Review Request: mingw32-freeglut - Fedora MinGW alternative to the OpenGL Utility Toolkit (GLUT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528892 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-23 19:21:13 EDT --- mingw32-freeglut-2.6.0-0.1.rc1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update mingw32-freeglut'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-0723 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 526126] Review Request: python3 - Python 3.x (backwards incompatible version)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526126
--- Comment #31 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 19:51:58
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #29)
(In reply to comment #26)
Dave, I've downloaded your new specfile and taken a look at it.
1) I love the description for __os_install_post. It explains the problem
clearly and is very helpful
Thanks.
Actually, I now think my description is wrong; I now think the definition of
__os_install_post comes from /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros (from our downstream
redhat-rpm-config rpm).
I'll send a patch to add a %{__python} argument there, which should cover
building rpms on top of this one; they should be able to a
%define __python /usr/bin/python3
and rpmbuild should then bytecompile .py files in those rpms with that binary.
I don't think doing so covers the case of this core python3 package though, so
maybe we still need the current workaround (we'd have to somehow define
%{__python} to be the freshly-built python3.1, and set LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc,
which I don't see how to do sanely)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530205] Review Request: AntTweakBar - GUI library for videogame property editing UIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530205 --- Comment #7 from Sean Middleditch s...@middleditch.us 2009-10-23 20:52:36 EDT --- Doh. :) Fixed, here they are: http://middleditch.us/sean/fedora/AntTweakBar/AntTweakBar.spec http://middleditch.us/sean/fedora/AntTweakBar/AntTweakBar-1.13-5.fc12.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 521983] New package for Dogtag PKI: osutil
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=521983 --- Comment #9 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 22:23:13 EDT --- updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/osutil/osutil.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/osutil/osutil-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522272] New Package for Dogtag PKI: symkey
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522272 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 22:30:49 EDT --- updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/symkey/symkey.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/symkey/symkey-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522895] New Package for Dogtag PKI: pki-native-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=522895 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 22:36:04 EDT --- updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-native-tools/pki-native-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-native-tools/pki-native-tools-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 521989] New Package for Dogtag PKI:pki-util
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=521989 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 22:42:28 EDT --- updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-util/pki-util.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-util/pki-util-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 521995] New Package for Dogtag PKI:pki-java-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=521995 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 22:56:17 EDT --- updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-java-tools/pki-java-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-java-tools/pki-java-tools-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 521993] New Package for Dogtag PKI:pki-setup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=521993 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 22:58:29 EDT --- updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-setup/pki-setup.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-setup/pki-setup-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522204] New Package for Dogtag PKI: dogtag-pki-common-ui
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522204 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 23:01:43 EDT --- Updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/dogtag-pki-common-ui/dogtag-pki-common-ui.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/dogtag-pki-common-ui/dogtag-pki-common-ui-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522207] New Package for Dogtag PKI: pki-common
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522207 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 23:05:55 EDT --- Updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-common/pki-common.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-common/pki-common-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 521255] New package for Dogtag PKI: pki-selinux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=521255 --- Comment #8 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 23:17:00 EDT --- Updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-setup/pki-selinux.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-setup/pki-selinux-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522208] New Package for Dogtag PKI: dogtag-pki-ca-ui
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522208 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 23:22:52 EDT --- Updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/dogtag-pki-ca-ui/dogtag-pki-ca-ui.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/dogtag-pki-ca-ui/dogtag-pki-ca-ui-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522210] New Package for Dogtag PKI: pki-ca
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522210 --- Comment #11 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 23:36:33 EDT --- Updated spec and src.rpm files can be found here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-ca/pki-ca.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-ca/pki-ca-1.3.0-3.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 521996] New Package for Dogtag PKI: pki-silent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=521996 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-10-23 23:44:21 EDT --- Updated spec file and src rpm: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-silent/pki-silent.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-silent/pki-silent-1.3.0-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215258] Review Request: clucene - A C++ port of Lucene
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=215258 Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com 2009-10-24 00:12:26 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: clucene New Branches: EL-5 Owners: deji -- 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 484798] Review Request: xiphos - Bible study and research tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484798 Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com 2009-10-24 00:15:38 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: xiphos New Branches: EL-5 Owners: deji -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 530684] New: Review Request: nordugrid-arc1 - Advanced Resource Connector
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: nordugrid-arc1 - Advanced Resource Connector https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530684 Summary: Review Request: nordugrid-arc1 - Advanced Resource Connector Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/nordugrid-arc1.spec SRPM URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/nordugrid-arc1-0.9.4-0.rc3.fc11.src.rpm Description: NorduGrid is a collaboration aiming at development, maintenance and support of the free Grid middleware, known as the Advanced Resource Connector (ARC). The Advanced Resource Connector (ARC) brings computing resources together across institutional boundaries. This concept is commonly referred to as a computational grid. Historically, grids address the organisation of distributed storage of data and parallel computation, but arbitrary services are thinkable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
