[Bug 544384] Review Request: report - Incident reporting library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544384 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 526263] Review Request: l7-protocols - Protocol definitions files for l7-filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526263
--- Comment #12 from Marcus Moeller m...@marcus-moeller.ch 2009-12-17
03:29:00 EDT ---
Debian Guys had similar discussion about placing the protocol definitions:
They've ended up with the simplest solution: protocol definitions are put in
/etc and they are marked as conffiles.
http://bugs.debian.org/546665
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/09/msg00860.html
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ap-pkg-conffiles.html#sE.1
I personally prefer to place them into %{_datadir}.
Besides that, the package has been updated:
- made tests the main package and defined named subpackage
Spec URL:
http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/build/l7-protocols/20090528-5/l7-tests.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/build/l7-protocols/20090528-5/l7-tests-20090528-5.fc11.src.rpm
rpmlint SRPMS/l7-tests-20090528-5.fc11.src.rpm
RPMS/noarch/l7-protocols-20090528-5.fc11.noarch.rpm
RPMS/i586/l7-tests-debuginfo-20090528-5.fc11.i586.rpm
RPMS/i586/l7-tests-20090528-5.fc11.i586.rpm
l7-tests-debuginfo.i586: E: debuginfo-without-sources
Not sure how to get rid of these debuginfo-without-sources message.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 533919] Review Request: mplus fonts - The M+ family of fonts designed by Coji Morishita
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533919 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-12-17 03:55:50 EDT --- Hi Igshaan, It's perfectly ok to take time do do things right, as long as you actually do it. I only dislike people who make you spend a lot of time on package reviews, and then never actually finish their package :( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226541] Merge Review: wireshark
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226541 Bug 226541 depends on bug 203642, which changed state. Bug 203642 Summary: some .so should be in -devel, or not shipped? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=203642 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are 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 544384] Review Request: report - Incident reporting library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544384
--- Comment #4 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-12-17 05:28:07 EDT ---
formal review is here, see the notes below:
OK source files match upstream:
70ab9e22d9f21e03c0e43357072ecea8ed55ddab report-0.4.tar.gz
OK* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros
consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible (GPLv2+). License text not included
upstream.
OK latest version is being packaged.
BAD BuildRequires are proper.
N/A compiler flags are appropriate.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
N/A debuginfo package looks complete.
OK* rpmlint is silent.
BAD final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK no scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK no headers.
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.
- I accept the reasoning for the package name from comment #3, but it can be
useful for a straightforward upgrade path
(after the python bindings are created) to add now Provide: python-report =
%{version}-%{release} into the main package
- the usual form of spec file contains the definition of subpackages directly
after the main package and before the %prep section,
the %files sections for the sub-packages are placed after the main %files
section
- you should omit the BuildArch and BuildRequires in the sub-packages, they are
inherited from the main package
- you should use Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} in the sub-packages
instead of just the hardcoded version
- please include the license text in the upstream source archive and then as
%doc in the package
- you can use fedorahosted facility to publish the source archive
- rpmlint complains a bit
report.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.4-1 ['0.4-2.fc13', '0.4-2']
= looks as an omission
report-gtk.noarch: W: no-documentation
report-plugin-bugzilla.noarch: W: no-documentation
= can be ignored
Thanks goes to Michael for his almost complete review making my work much
easier.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542747] Review Request: oglappth - Libraries for the oglappth chemistry 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=542747 --- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-17 05:56:43 EDT --- I haven't agreed to take on the review :) Anyway, you could, again, make the files listing more explicit. Did you run rpmlint on the packages? The %description of devel seems a bit long, looking at the spec file (I'm not sure, though). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548180] Review Request: hostapd - IEEE 802.11 AP, IEEE 802.1X/WPA/WPA2/EAP/RADIUS Authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548180 --- Comment #10 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 06:52:36 EDT --- *** Bug 230449 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 230449] Review Request: hostapd - User space daemon for access point
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=230449 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |DUPLICATE --- Comment #12 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 06:52:36 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 548180 *** -- 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 548422] New: Review Request: flash-kernel - Utility for writing kernels into flash memory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: flash-kernel - Utility for writing kernels into flash memory https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548422 Summary: Review Request: flash-kernel - Utility for writing kernels into flash memory Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: d...@danny.cz QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/flash-kernel.spec SRPM URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/flash-kernel-2.27-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: flash-kernel is a script which will put the kernel and initramfs in the boot location of embedded devices that don't load the kernel and initramfs directly from /boot. flash-kernel supports devices that boot from flash memory (hence the name) as well as some devices that require a special boot image on the disk. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 546704] Review Request: python-whoosh - Fast, pure-Python full text indexing, search, and spell checking library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=546704 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 2009-12-17 07:24:41 EDT --- Review: Good: - name ok - using macros - buildroot ok - rpmlint clean - %clean section is there - permissions ok - %files section ok - arch ok - no .la files - no libs - no desktop file needed - builds in koji NEEDSWORK: - description is bad: If you do a 'yum search Java' you'll get this package, which has nothing to do with java... in PKG-INFO is: Whoosh is a fast, pure-Python indexing and search library. Programmers can use it to easily add search functionality to their applications and websites. Because Whoosh is pure Python, you don't have to compile or install a binary support library and/or make Python work with a JVM, yet Whoosh is still very fast at indexing and searching. Every part of how Whoosh works can be extended or replaced to meet your needs exactly. How about that? - BR wrong: please require only python-setuptools and not python-setuptools-devel - You should query upstream to include a license.txt or COPYING file. It's referenced in PKG-INFO, but nowhere to find. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 532241] Review Request: emacs-identica-mode - Identica mode 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=532241 Arun SAG saga...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226379] Merge Review: rsh
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226379 --- Comment #5 from Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 07:59:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) All the things which are must are ok, I would prefer to add README and BUGS file as %doc into main package. Done. Thanks for the 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 225670] Merge Review: cups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225670 Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||at...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|at...@redhat.com 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 529423] Review Request: mingw32-OpenSceneGraph - Fedora mingw high performance real-time graphics toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529423 --- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 08:14:34 EDT --- Review: + builds fine in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1877023 + rpmlint is NOT silent [pe...@workplace ~]$ rpmlint Desktop/mingw32-Open* mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosg.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgGA.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgTerrain.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgParticle.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgDB.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgShadow.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgFX.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgText.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgAnimation.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgManipulator.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgSim.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgUtil.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgVolume.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgViewer.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgWidget.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosg.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgGA.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgTerrain.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgParticle.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgDB.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgShadow.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgFX.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgText.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgAnimation.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgManipulator.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgSim.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgUtil.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/openscenegraph.pc mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgVolume.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgViewer.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libosgWidget.dll.a mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.noarch: W: non-standard-dir-in-usr i686-pc-mingw32 mingw32-OpenThreads.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libOpenThreads.dll.a mingw32-OpenThreads.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/openthreads.pc mingw32-OpenThreads.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
[Bug 529423] Review Request: mingw32-OpenSceneGraph - Fedora mingw high performance real-time graphics toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529423 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Riemens fgfs.ste...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 08:40:50 EDT --- Thanks for the review! I've fixed the issue: http://www.riemens.org/fs/temp/mingw32-OpenSceneGraph-2.8.2-2.fc12.src.rpm http://www.riemens.org/fs/temp/mingw32-OpenSceneGraph.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 529423] Review Request: mingw32-OpenSceneGraph - Fedora mingw high performance real-time graphics toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529423 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 08:44:16 EDT --- Great. This package is APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225670] Merge Review: cups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225670
--- Comment #1 from Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 08:40:35 EDT ---
Review of cups-1.4.2-17.fc13:
Legend: + means OK, - means not OK.
+ MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
- MUST(1): The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
+ MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
+ MUST: The License field in spec match the actual license
+ MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file must be included in %doc
+ MUST: The spec file written in American English
- MUST(2): The spec file for the package is legible
+ MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL
MUST: The package successfully compile
+ MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
- MUST(3): The spec file handle locales properly
+ MUST: Every package which stores shared library files in any of the dynamic
linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
- MUST(4): Packages does not bundle copies of system libraries
+ MUST: Package own all directories that it creates
+ MUST: Package does not list a file more than once in the spec file
- MUST(5): Permissions on files must be set properly. Every %files section must
include a %defattr(...) line
+ MUST: Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
+ MUST: Package use macros consistently
+ MUST: Package contains code, or permissable content
+ MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
+ MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application
+ MUST: Header files in a -devel package
+ MUST: Static libraries in a -static package
+ MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
+ MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package
+ MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
+ MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built
+ MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
+ MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages
+ MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
+ MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
2:
- don't define initdir macro, use existing %{_initddir} macro
- don't use /usr/lib/cups for binaries. Directory /usr/libexec/cups should be
used instead.
- don't use obsolete Prereq and BuildReq. Use modern Requires and
BuildRequires instead.
- remove unneeded versioned BuildRequires (gcc, libselinux, audit-libs, dbus)
- drop -fstack-protector-all gcc flag. -fstack-protector is sufficient, I
think. Consider to build cupsd (and other programs exposed on the network)
as PIEs.
- append %{?_smp_mflags} to make command
- don't use hardcoded paths like /usr/bin, /usr/share, /etc. Use appropriate
rpm macro (%{_bindir}, %{_datadir}, %{_sysconfdir}) instead.
3:
- use %find_lang to package locale files. Check
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files
for more info.
4:
- fire away Source4 and use system wide pstopdf, please.
5:
- vast majority of binaries have incorrect perms. Please use 755 permissions
for all shared libraries and binaries.
There are so many rpmlint errors. Please fix them or explain why are they
invalid.
--
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 226101] Merge Review: lm_sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226101
--- Comment #7 from Nikola Pajkovsky npajk...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 08:45:10
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
npajkovs, may I assume you will take care if this ?
As for the review, Thanks!
Here is my take on things which need fixing:
(In reply to comment #4)
[NO] specfile uses macros consistently: %{SOURCEx} should probably be
%{sourcex}, Buildroot: - BuildRoot:
Writing SOURCE with all caps is quite normal in spec files (most do
it this way), and is allowed as long as it is in all caps everywhere
inside the specfile, which it is.
The buildroot thingie should be fixed.
[NO] rpmlint is silent
$ rpmlint *.rpm
lm_sensors.i686: W: dangerous-command-in-%pre mv
lm_sensors.i686: W: dangerous-command-in-%trigger mv
lm_sensors.i686: W: dangerous-command-in-%trigger mv
lm_sensors.i686: W: one-line-command-in-%trigger
/usr/bin/sysconfig-lm_sensors-convert
These can all be ignored
ignored
lm_sensors-libs.i686: W: summary-not-capitalized lm_sensors core libraries
Should be fixed
fixed
lm_sensors-libs.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libsensors.so.4.2.0
e...@glibc_2.0
lm_sensors-libs.i686: W: no-documentation
Can be ignored
ignored
lm_sensors-libs.i686: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin
/usr/lib/libsensors.so.4.2.0
lm_sensors-libs.i686: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun
fixed
Oops, see below.
/usr/lib/libsensors.so.4.2.0
lm_sensors-sensord.i686: E: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/sensord
lm_sensors
lm_sensors-sensord.i686: W: incoherent-init-script-name sensord
('lm_sensors-sensord', 'lm_sensors-sensordd')
Can be ignored.
ignored. we will use same name as upstream
Imho the following lines should be added to the spec file:
%post libs -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun libs -p /sbin/ldconfig
Correct, and the ld_config from the main package %post should removed
And the main package's:
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
Should be removed completely.
fixed
[???] Please consider using Requires: dmidecode instead of Requires:
/usr/sbin/dmidecode
No need to not use file requires when the files are in one of /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
ignored
[???] %defattr(-,root,root,-) should be used instead of
%defattr(-,root,root)
Can / should be fixed.
fixed
Regards,
Hans
--
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 225901] Merge Review: inn
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225901 Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||inn-2.5.1-3.fc13 Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #3 from Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 08:49:46 EDT --- inn-2.5.1-3.fc13 looks fine for me. -- 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 225901] Merge Review: inn
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225901 Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are 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 529423] Review Request: mingw32-OpenSceneGraph - Fedora mingw high performance real-time graphics toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529423 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Riemens fgfs.ste...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 08:52:51 EDT --- That was quick! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mingw32-OpenSceneGraph Short Description: Fedora mingw high performance real-time graphics toolkit Owners: stefanriemens Branches: 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 547226] Review Request: pgu - pygame addon for making GUIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547226 --- Comment #4 from Florent LC louizat...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 09:40:28 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) (In reply to comment #2) What did I miss? Nothing, I'w new to packaging too and missed that, I apologize. Ok, no problem ;) If they are examples, then they should moved moved out of /usr/bin and into an examples directory as part of %doc Ok, that's what I did, here are the updated files: Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~louizatakk/rpm/python-pgu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~louizatakk/rpm/python-pgu-0.12.3-2.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 544016] Review Request: cbpolicyd - Postfix anti-spam policy 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=544016 --- Comment #2 from Chris St. Pierre chris.a.st.pie...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 10:25:45 EDT --- Turns out there was a blocking bug in 2.0.9, so v2.0.10 has been released. New specfile is up, and a new SRPM is at: http://www.nebrwesleyan.edu/people/stpierre/cbpolicyd-2.0.10-1.fc11.src.rpm I've also added a logrotate config to the 2.0.10 package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226101] Merge Review: lm_sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226101 Karel Klíč kk...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Karel Klíč kk...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 10:35:57 EDT --- I am giving fedora-review+. Thanks. -- 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 226101] Merge Review: lm_sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226101 Nikola Pajkovsky npajk...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548482] New: Review Request: gnome-dvb-daemon - Digital Television manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnome-dvb-daemon - Digital Television manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548482 Summary: Review Request: gnome-dvb-daemon - Digital Television manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bnoc...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~hadess/gnome-dvb-daemon/gnome-dvb-daemon.spec SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~hadess/gnome-dvb-daemon/gnome-dvb-daemon-0.1.13-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: gnome-dvb-daemon contains a daemon responsible for handling Digital Television adapters, including recording, listing programs schedules and scanning for channels. This package also contains a Totem plugin for the movie player and a plugin for sharing recordings and live TV over UPNP using Rygel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548180] Review Request: hostapd - IEEE 802.11 AP, IEEE 802.1X/WPA/WPA2/EAP/RADIUS Authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548180 --- Comment #11 from John W. Linville linvi...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 10:45:22 EDT --- * Thu Dec 17 2009 John W. Linville linvi...@redhat.com - 0.6.9-6 - Enable RADIUS server - Enable wired and none drivers - Use BSD license option SRPM: http://linville.fedorapeople.org/hostapd-0.6.9-6.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 548482] Review Request: gnome-dvb-daemon - Digital Television manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548482 Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||532470 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 532470] Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-bad-free - GStreamer streaming media framework bad plug-ins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532470 Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||548482 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548180] Review Request: hostapd - IEEE 802.11 AP, IEEE 802.1X/WPA/WPA2/EAP/RADIUS Authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548180 --- Comment #12 from Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu 2009-12-17 11:00:56 EDT --- I notice you haven't uncommented CONFIG_IEEE80211N in the configuration so it won't have 802.11n support. The build I'm using at the moment does have that enabled (although I don't have any clients to test it with) and it doesn't seem to have caused any problems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548180] Review Request: hostapd - IEEE 802.11 AP, IEEE 802.1X/WPA/WPA2/EAP/RADIUS Authenticator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548180 --- Comment #13 from John W. Linville linvi...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 11:07:24 EDT --- Tom, thanks for the report! I would be open to enabling that, just haven't tested it myself. If you don't mind, let's get the package approved and then we can play with further configuration options...fair enough? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 547655] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-RTx - RT extension installer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547655 --- Comment #4 from Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org 2009-12-17 11:07:22 EDT --- Upstream applied the patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 544384] Review Request: report - Incident reporting library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544384 --- Comment #5 from Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 11:07:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) Thank you very much Dan. I've fixed all the issues you noted. Updated: Spec URL: https://fedorahosted.org/released/report/report.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorahosted.org/released/report/report-0.4-3.fc11.src.rpm TAR URL: https://fedorahosted.org/released/report/report-0.4.tar.gz -gavin... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548482] Review Request: gnome-dvb-daemon - Digital Television manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548482 --- Comment #1 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 12:22:58 EDT --- Dumb question - does it make sense to split off the totem plugin such that you'd be running the daemon on some server box, and the totem plugin on other machines on your network? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548522] New: Review Request: autotest-client - Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: autotest-client - Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548522 Summary: Review Request: autotest-client - Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jla...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://jlaska.fedorapeople.org/autoqa/autotest-client.spec SRPM URL: http://jlaska.fedorapeople.org/autoqa/autotest-client-0.11.0-3.fc12.src.rpm Description: Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing. It is designed primarily to test the Linux kernel, though it is useful for many other functions such as qualifying new hardware. The autotest-client package contains only the client-side software and does not include upstream tests. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 538465] Review Request: libmx - A clutter toolkit for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538465 --- Comment #4 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 12:37:56 EDT --- Given the existence of the mx/mx-devel packages, a little more description in the -devel packages might help -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 538465] Review Request: libmx - A clutter toolkit for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538465 Till Maas opensou...@till.name changed: What|Removed |Added CC||opensou...@till.name --- Comment #5 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2009-12-17 12:42:48 EDT --- There is also another project called mx/libmx which seems to be older and still be maintained: http://www.lostsidedead.com/mx/ I suggest to use moblin-mx to avoid potential future conflicts, but this might be worth discussion on fedora-devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 538465] Review Request: libmx - A clutter toolkit for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538465
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-12-17
13:29:18 EDT ---
just had a quick look:
* I think that %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/mx needs to be tagged with %doc.
* Also please span the description to 80 columns as much as possible.
* Source0 seems wrong.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 13:35:12 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: dogtag-pki-ca-ui Short Description: The Dogtag Certificate Authority User Interface Owners: kwright Branches: F-11, F-12, EL-5 InitialCC: ausil -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 13:37:39 EDT --- Since this has been approved, I'm requesting the cvs branches be created. However, the review flag is still set to ? instead of +. I believe this is inadvertent. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: dogtag-pki-common-ui Short Description: The Dogtag PKI Common Framework User Interface Owners: kwright Branches: F-11, F-12, EL-5 InitialCC: ausil -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522777] Review Request: perl-Verilog-Perl - Verilog parsing routines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522777 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 14:22:00 EDT --- perl-Verilog-Perl-3.221-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 522777] Review Request: perl-Verilog-Perl - Verilog parsing routines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522777 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||3.221-1.el5 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542715] Review Request: RabbitVCS - Easy version control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542715 --- Comment #5 from Juan Manuel Rodriguez nus...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 14:31:39 EDT --- Sorry for the delay. I don't understand how to generate the SRPM to fix the permission errors. I understand I have to set the permissions to 0644, but I don't understand *where* on the spec do I specify it. I uploaded a newer spec with all your considerations, along with a new SRPM, that I placed here: http://nushio.fedorapeople.org/rabbitvcs/rabbitvcs-0.12.1-2.fc12.src.rpm Using ExcludesArch while Bug 474428 is solved, after that, I'll make the package noarch. Thanks for your 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 548561] New: Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for PowerDNS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for PowerDNS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548561 Summary: Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for PowerDNS Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: keij...@stone-it.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://leon.fedorapeople.org/files/poweradmin/poweradmin.spec SRPM URL: http://leon.fedorapeople.org/files/poweradmin/poweradmin-2.1.3-5.fc12.src.rpm Description: Poweradmin is a friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server. The interface has full support for most of the features of PowerDNS. It has full support for all zone types ( master, native and slave), for supermasters for automatic provisioning of slave zones, full support for IPv6 and comes with multi-language support. See feature list for all features. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1878241 rpmlint outputs 2 warnings, both of which i can explain: poweradmin.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /var/www/html/poweradmin/locale/nl_NL/LC_MESSAGES/messages.mo poweradmin.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%post rm The locale file belongs to the poweradmin package and is not meant for system-wide usage. The rm command is to remove the ./install dir when upgrading the package. If it's not removed, PowerAdmin won't function properly anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #63 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-12-17 14:50:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #62) Tricky. The thing is that I am not the real upstream author for the majority of these files. I have bundled them and made their setup and integration easier for Debian. So in that regard my changes rightly appear in a separate diff file (the same as if you made the changes). But for you, I am upstream for this repackaging. I _could_ include the patches in the tar file and still comply with Debian's own package policies (although some in Debian might not agree) by still keeping the patches under the debian/ directory, in debian/patches/. I may do this in the next release. @Peter you are not the real upstream author? Who is the real project owner? Is there another project homepage then this one from Debian? From my point of view, we should avoid the creation of differents upstreams tar balls. so it may be nice, if you can work together with the real upstream to get a common tar ball in with the huge diff file is integrated. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #18 from Adam Miller maxamill...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 15:00:25 EDT --- New release from upstream Spec URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/lessfs.spec SRPM URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/lessfs-0.9.4-1.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 479594] Review Request: email - A command line SMTP client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479594 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-12-17 15:50:17 EDT --- No answer from upstream... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 541992] Review Request: perl-PDF-Create - Create PDF files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=541992 Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #7 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-12-17 16:05:15 EDT --- imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 528150] Review Request: invulgotracker - Tasks projects tracking 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=528150 --- Comment #13 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 16:52:38 EDT --- The package itself looks fine and fixes all problems, but there is a trival rpmlint warning that you should fix: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/invulgotracker-* invulgotracker.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 10) 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Make sure to use spaces in line 10 too. And the changelog format is not quite right: Instead of *Thu Dec 03 2009 it should be * Thu Dec 03 2009 Note the whitespace before the date. You can fix this when updating to 0.61 which was just released. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548607] New: Review Request: pvs-sbcl - SRI's Prototype Verification System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pvs-sbcl - SRI's Prototype Verification System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548607 Summary: Review Request: pvs-sbcl - SRI's Prototype Verification System Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: loganje...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/pvs/pvs-sbcl.spec SRPM URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/pvs/pvs-sbcl-4.2-1.svn20091008.fc12.src.rpm Description: PVS is a verification system: that is, a specification language integrated with support tools and a theorem prover. It is intended to capture the state-of-the-art in mechanized formal methods and to be sufficiently rugged that it can be used for significant applications. PVS is a research prototype: it evolves and improves as we develop or apply new capabilities, and as the stress of real use exposes new requirements. This is a build with SBCL. The name was chosen so that builds with other Common Lisp engines in the future are not precluded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479527] Review Request: synfigstudio - Vector-based 2D animation studio
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479527 Bug 479527 depends on bug 531773, which changed state. Bug 531773 Summary: Review Request: synfig - Vector-based 2D animation rendering backend https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531773 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 531773] Review Request: synfig - Vector-based 2D animation rendering backend
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531773 Luya Tshimbalanga l...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #9 from Luya Tshimbalanga l...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 17:29:48 EDT --- Closing this report because synfig is available on repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 529374] Review Request: ethos - Plugin framework for GLib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529374 --- Comment #8 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 18:03:52 EDT --- Sorry, this got lost in amongst 100s of abrt reports. Fixed the license SPEC: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/ethos.spec SRPM: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/ethos-0.2.2-2.fc12.src.rpm koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1878617 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548607] Review Request: pvs-sbcl - SRI's Prototype Verification System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548607
David A. Wheeler dwhee...@dwheeler.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dwhee...@dwheeler.com
--- Comment #1 from David A. Wheeler dwhee...@dwheeler.com 2009-12-17
18:39:58 EDT ---
Thanks for doing this! I did a quick scan of the spec file to start with, and
have a few questions based on just that scan:
* I think the release number should be changed. It's currently
1.svn20091008%{?dist}, but I don't think that will sort correctly with later
items. As I interpret
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages;,
it should be something like 1.20091008svn%{?dist}. I understand why you had
to pull from svn, and agree with that decision, but I'm not sure that will sort
well later.
* In the Summary, I'd add (PVS) at the end, to simply the job of keyword
searchers. The expanded name of PVS is more historical than reality... I think
it's always referred to by its initials, not its full name.
* Patch0: I think it's okay for now, but in the long term, it might be nice for
there to be a build option that skips mona and uses the existing packaging
system. That way it'll be easier to package for other distros, *and* it may
reduce your longer-term pain as PVS changes. I'd at least send the patch to
the developers, explaining why it's needed.
I'm surprised at the number of cannot be built documents due to missing
components; did you ask SRI for them? At the least, I suspect Rushby wouldn't
mind releasing his /homes/rushby/tex/prelude as OSS, or at least enough to
build one of the docs. I don't see a license issue with the spec the way it
is, so I don't think that should hold up anything, but it'd be nice for the
future.
I fear the amount of time it took to create *this* spec. This is definitely
not a program that was designed to be packaged. Eek.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548607] Review Request: pvs-sbcl - SRI's Prototype Verification System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548607 David A. Wheeler dwhee...@dwheeler.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dwhee...@dwheeler.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 531255] Review Request: CGSI-gSOAP - GSI plugin for gSOAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531255 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:52:00 EDT --- CGSI-gSOAP-1.3.3.2-2.20090920cvs.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502991] Review Request: erlang-erlsom - Support for XML Schema in Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502991 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:52:49 EDT --- erlang-erlsom-1.2.1-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502991] Review Request: erlang-erlsom - Support for XML Schema in Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502991 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|1.2.1-3.fc11|1.2.1-3.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516523] Review Request: globus-duct-common - Globus Toolkit - Globus Duct 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=516523 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:51:32 EDT --- globus-duct-common-2.1-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516523] Review Request: globus-duct-common - Globus Toolkit - Globus Duct 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=516523 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:50:38 EDT --- globus-duct-common-2.1-1.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516525] Review Request: globus-duroc-common - Globus Toolkit - DUROC Common Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516525 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:52:17 EDT --- globus-duroc-common-2.1-1.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 531255] Review Request: CGSI-gSOAP - GSI plugin for gSOAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531255 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|1.3.3.2-2.20090920cvs.fc11 |1.3.3.2-2.20090920cvs.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516523] Review Request: globus-duct-common - Globus Toolkit - Globus Duct 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=516523 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|2.1-1.el4 |2.1-1.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516523] Review Request: globus-duct-common - Globus Toolkit - Globus Duct 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=516523 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|2.1-1.fc12 |2.1-1.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516535] Review Request: globus-gram-job-manager-scripts - Globus Toolkit - GRAM Job ManagerScripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516535 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|0.7-1.fc12 |0.7-1.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:52:30 EDT --- pki-native-tools-1.3.0-4.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 pki-native-tools'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-1011 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542075] Review Request: php-pear-Net-URL2 - Class for parsing and handling URL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542075 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:56:19 EDT --- php-pear-Net-URL2-0.3.0-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542075] Review Request: php-pear-Net-URL2 - Class for parsing and handling URL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542075 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|0.3.0-1.fc11|0.3.0-1.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516525] Review Request: globus-duroc-common - Globus Toolkit - DUROC Common Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516525 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|2.1-1.fc12 |2.1-1.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 520352] Review Request: python-pip - Pip installs packages. Python packages. An easy_install replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520352 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:56:47 EDT --- python-pip-0.4-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516535] Review Request: globus-gram-job-manager-scripts - Globus Toolkit - GRAM Job ManagerScripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516535 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:53:28 EDT --- globus-gram-job-manager-scripts-0.7-1.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 520352] Review Request: python-pip - Pip installs packages. Python packages. An easy_install replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520352 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|0.4-1.fc12 |0.4-1.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502991] Review Request: erlang-erlsom - Support for XML Schema in Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502991 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:56:35 EDT --- erlang-erlsom-1.2.1-3.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502991] Review Request: erlang-erlsom - Support for XML Schema in Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502991 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|1.2.1-3.el5 |1.2.1-3.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 531255] Review Request: CGSI-gSOAP - GSI plugin for gSOAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531255 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:57:26 EDT --- CGSI-gSOAP-1.3.3.2-2.20090920cvs.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 526998] Review Request: volpack - Portable library for fast volume rendering
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526998 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:55:07 EDT --- volpack-1.0c7-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 531255] Review Request: CGSI-gSOAP - GSI plugin for gSOAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531255 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|1.3.3.2-2.20090920cvs.el4 |1.3.3.2-2.20090920cvs.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516531] Review Request: globus-gass-cache-program - Globus Toolkit - Tools to manipulate local and remote GASS caches
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516531 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 18:57:10 EDT --- globus-gass-cache-program-2.7-1.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 516531] Review Request: globus-gass-cache-program - Globus Toolkit - Tools to manipulate local and remote GASS caches
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516531 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|2.7-1.fc11 |2.7-1.el4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 526998] Review Request: volpack - Portable library for fast volume rendering
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526998 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||1.0c7-3.el5 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 548482] Review Request: gnome-dvb-daemon - Digital Television manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548482 --- Comment #2 from Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 19:41:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Dumb question - does it make sense to split off the totem plugin such that you'd be running the daemon on some server box, and the totem plugin on other machines on your network? The Totem plugin doesn't hard-require Totem, so it's just a couple of python files on your computer... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-12-17 20:14:11 EDT --- Hi kevin, sorry. looks I forgot to change fedora-review flag.I have set it 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 531252] Review Request: lfc - LCG File Catalog (LFC)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531252 Steve Traylen steve.tray...@cern.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW AssignedTo|steve.tray...@cern.ch |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #9 from Steve Traylen steve.tray...@cern.ch 2009-12-17 22:52:40 EDT --- Won't be able to look at this for nearly a month to un-assigning. 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 542461] Review Request: digna-fonts - Handwriting font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542461 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:19:50 EDT --- oflb-dignas-handwriting-fonts-20031109-2.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542518] Review Request: usbview - USB topology and device viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542518 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:20:49 EDT --- usbview-1.1-3.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 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 usbview'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-13277 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #66 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:21:29 EDT --- mod_proxy_html-3.1.2-6.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 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 mod_proxy_html'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13279 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||3.1.2-5.fc12 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:23:43 EDT --- pki-native-tools-1.3.0-4.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 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 pki-native-tools'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13288 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 547017] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-Config-Simple - Add Config::Simple support to CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547017 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:22:34 EDT --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-Config-Simple-1.01-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 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 perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-Config-Simple'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-13282 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 --- Comment #67 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:24:23 EDT --- mod_proxy_html-3.1.2-5.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:28:12 EDT --- pki-native-tools-1.3.0-4.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 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 pki-native-tools'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-13314 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542518] Review Request: usbview - USB topology and device viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542518 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:28:41 EDT --- usbview-1.1-3.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 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 usbview'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13316 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542754] Review Request: artha - A handy thesaurus based on WordNet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542754 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:25:51 EDT --- artha-0.9.1-3.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 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 artha'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13301 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:29:12 EDT --- symkey-1.3.0-4.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||1.3.0-4.fc11 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 524379] Review Request: gscribble - A desktop blogging client for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524379 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #48 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:30:28 EDT --- gscribble-0.0.2.1-1.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 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 gscribble'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13325 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 533899] Review Request: activemq-cpp - C++ implementation of JMS-like messaging client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533899 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:31:21 EDT --- activemq-cpp-3.0.1-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 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 activemq-cpp'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-13332 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:31:00 EDT --- jaxodraw-2.0.1-4.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||2.0.1-4.fc11 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 --- Comment #68 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-17 23:37:03 EDT --- mod_proxy_html-3.1.2-5.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
