[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-14 21:54:36 EDT --- pfscalibration-1.4-5.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 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 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-14 22:04:25 EDT --- pfscalibration-1.4-5.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 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 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-09 02:57:31 EDT --- pfscalibration-1.4-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pfscalibration-1.4-5.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #17 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-08 05:38:44 EDT --- Thanks for the update. Expect an formal review shortly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #18 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-08 08:00:42 EDT --- Review: OK source files match upstream: 1844a6e3f03f585dbc8bcc3eaacf66b9 pfscalibration-1.4.tar.gz OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK summary is OK. OK description is OK. OK dist tag is present. OK build root is OK. OK license field matches the actual license. OK license is open source-compatible. OK license text included in package. OK BuildRequires are proper. OK compiler flags are appropriate. -O3 preference was explained in specfile -g is now present, debuginfo package complete. OK %clean is present. OK package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). OK package installs properly. OK debuginfo package looks complete. OK rpmlint is silent. OK final provides and requires are sane: pfscalibration = 1.4-4.fc10 pfscalibration(x86-64) = 1.4-4.fc10 = /bin/bash /usr/bin/perl dcraw jhead libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgomp.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpfs-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) perl perl(Getopt::Long) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) N/A no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. N/A 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 code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK no headers. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no static libraries. OK no libtool .la files. remove duplicated %doc at the end of %files section. 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 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-08 10:23:26 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pfscalibration Short Description: Scripts and programs for photometric calibration Owners: drep...@redhat.com Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #20 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-09 00:31:16 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-09 02:57:27 EDT --- pfscalibration-1.4-5.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pfscalibration-1.4-5.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946
--- Comment #12 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-07 04:00:40
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
The compiler should be called with the full set of %{optflags} or the resulted
debuginfo package will be broken.
The flags provided are used. There are just some additional flags passed.
Nothing got broken.
Anyway, I have changed it slightly, similar to the way it is done in the pfstmo
package. I'm now replacing the -O2 option only with some additional options
for higher optimization. These higher optimizations are appropriate in this
case.
Please also include COPYING file in the %doc section of the package.
It would be also nice to add README files, ChangeLog and AUTHORS.
I did that.
The resulting files are here:
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration-1.4-3.fc10.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Bug 459946 depends on bug 459944, which changed state. Bug 459944 Summary: Review Request: pfstools - Programs for handling high-dynamic range images https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459944 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #13 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-07 04:58:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) The flags provided are used. There are just some additional flags passed. Nothing got broken. - Fedora specific compilation flags are not honoured. (rpm --eval %optflags) Overriding or filtering parts of these flags is permitted only if there's a good reason to do so. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags Anyway, I have changed it slightly, similar to the way it is done in the pfstmo package. I'm now replacing the -O2 option only with some additional options for higher optimization. These higher optimizations are appropriate in this case. - -O3 flag is generally forbidden (it makes debugging difficult). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #14 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-07 13:14:54 EDT --- There is a good reason for using slightly different flags and -O3 doesn't make debugging harder (where does this myth come from?). And it makes a difference for code with is vectorizable. This is the case here, this is purely mathematical code which can be optimized well by the compiler. Insisting on the rules is certainly a good thing, in general. But I know what I'm doing, I know which gcc options can benefit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #15 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-08 01:51:21 EDT --- Please put a small note in the spec file explaining O3 preference. All rest of the %optflags are honoured except -g. Stripping out -g will result in an incomplete -debuginfo 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 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #16 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-08 02:06:45 EDT --- Indeed, -g has been filtered out. I missed that, sorry. I fixed it and added a comment: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration-1.4-4.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #8 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-06 03:43:31 EDT --- With one little change it builds even if libtool in the buildroot is changed: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration-1.4-2.fc10.src.rpm Please review this. pfstools is now in Fedora. It is a prerequisite for this package and pfstools alone isn't really useful without pfscalibration and pfstmo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946
--- Comment #9 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-06 04:33:41 EDT
---
-Fix %changelog entry for each bump of version
pfscalibration.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.4-1 ['1.4-2.fc10',
'1.4-2']
-Source0 is 404 ! (sf project name is pfstools, %{name} expands to
pfscalibration)
-CXXFLAGS set to -O3 overrides Fedora's default level (-O2)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #10 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-06 13:59:56 EDT --- I've fixed all the problems pointed out and then some more (correct use of OpenMP). New versions of the files (same name): Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration-1.4-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946
Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|co...@gnome.eu.org
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #11 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-06 15:25:40 EDT
---
The compiler should be called with the full set of %{optflags} or the resulted
debuginfo package will be broken.
It looks like package does not honour external set of CXXFLAGS called by
rpmbuild:
+ CFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic'
+ export CFLAGS
+ CXXFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic'
+ export CXXFLAGS
+ FFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic
-I/usr/lib64/gfortran/modules'
+ export FFLAGS
+ ./configure
so yo needs to be patched somehow.
Please also include COPYING file in the %doc section of the package.
It would be also nice to add README files, ChangeLog and AUTHORS.
Please bump the release version of the package for each set of modification.
Thank you.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946
--- Comment #6 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-03 06:52:56 EDT
---
nrutil.cpp and nrutil.h are public domain.
(http://www.nr.com/public-domain.html)
I do not think there is need for patch1.
Source0 URL is still wrong, it should be:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/pfstools/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-03 14:27:39
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
nrutil.cpp and nrutil.h are public domain.
(http://www.nr.com/public-domain.html)
I do not think there is need for patch1.
The files used in the package are not on the list. This might be an oversight
but it's really not necessary to bicker about this. The code is using so
little from these files it's absolutely unnecessary to pull in so much code.
The patch is also an optimization.
Source0 URL is still wrong, it should be:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/pfstools/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
That's not what the URL referenced in comment #4 says and it shouldn't matter:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
This works just as well.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #3 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 15:56:00 EDT --- I've updated the files. The BuildRequires are added and I've updated to the most recent release. Note that in this update upstream included two files with questionable (at best) copyright. I've added a patch to not rely on those files, they are not used. Do they have to be removed from the .src.rpm? I have deliberately not added the complete URL. This would defeat the mirroring sourceforge is doing. It would be a bad idea to insist on this. Unfortunately sourceforge doesn't provide a nice URL interface to packages. Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration-1.4-1.fc10.src.rpm Please review again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tummy.com --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-02 20:16:44 EDT --- Not a review, but some comments: For the first, you should probibly exclude them if Fedora can't distribute them at all. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code You can (and should) specify a full URL for sourceforge hosted projects. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #5 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 20:41:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) For the first, you should probibly exclude them if Fedora can't distribute them at all. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net It's not that bad. The code is simply copyrighted, you need a license to use it. From what that page syas there is no reason to modify the tarball and exclude the file. The binaries are not tainted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||co...@gnome.eu.org Depends on||459944 --- Comment #2 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2008-12-15 14:08:49 EDT --- BuildRequires is missing pfstools-devel and libtool Please use complete URL to the upstream tarball in Source0. There is also a newer upstream release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Ulrich Drepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Customer Facing||--- --- Comment #1 from Ulrich Drepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-03 10:28:20 EDT --- Anybody going to volunteer? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
