[Bug 192052] Review Request: bitgtkmm (Gtkmm widgets for the bit library)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bitgtkmm (Gtkmm widgets for the bit library) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||183953 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 183953] Review Request: bit (A bit-oriented data stream parser and gtkmm widget set)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bit (A bit-oriented data stream parser and gtkmm widget set) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183953 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||192052 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191239] Review Request: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 03:36 EST --- MUST items: - rpmlint: Clean - Package name: Ok - Spec name: Ok - Meets packaging guidelines: NEEDSWORK - License: Ok - Spec in American English: Ok - Spec legible: Ok - Sources match upstream: Ok - Builds: Ok - BuildRequires: Ok - Locales: Ok - ldconfig: Ok - Relocation: Ok - Directory ownership: Ok - %files: Ok - %clean: Ok - Macros: Ok - Code vs. Content: Ok - Documentation: Ok - devel package: Ok - .desktop file: Ok SHOULD: - Includes license text: Ok - Mock build: Ok - Builds on all archs: Built on i386, x86_64 - Package functional: Tested on i386, x86_64 - Scriptlets: Ok - Subpackages: Ok NEEDSWORK: Source: seems to need to be http://dl.sf.net/sourceforge/qjackctl/[...] otherwise I get a 404 as is. The Requires: jack-audio-connection-kit = 0.80.0 is unnecessary as no such old version is going to be in Extras. The generic INSTALL instructions should not be packaged. The desktop file should be included as Source:, not embedded in the spec, as shown in the Desktop Files section of the packaging guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190101] Review Request: php-pear-Log
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Log https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190101 Bug 190101 depends on bug 190252, which changed state. Bug 190252 Summary: /usr/lib/php/pear used for noarch pear RPM. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190252 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190156] Review Request: php-pear-HTTP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-HTTP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190156 Bug 190156 depends on bug 190252, which changed state. Bug 190252 Summary: /usr/lib/php/pear used for noarch pear RPM. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190252 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Resolution||ERRATA Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190066] Review Request: php-pear-Mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190066 Bug 190066 depends on bug 190252, which changed state. Bug 190252 Summary: /usr/lib/php/pear used for noarch pear RPM. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190252 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192060] New: Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 Summary: Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/blobwars.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/blobwars-1.05-1.src.rpm Description: Blob Wars : Metal Blob Solid. This is Episode I of the Blob Wars Saga. You must undertake the role of fearless Blob solider, Bob, as he infiltrates various enemy installations and hideouts in an attempt to rescue as many MIAs as possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189268] Review Request: xscreensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xscreensaver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189268 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 05:38 EST --- I saw that this bug is blocked by FE-ACCEPT. But currently it seems that I have no sponsors on my cvsgroup. Note: This is my first review package. I made this bug block FE-NEEDSPONCER. My srpm and spec are still on http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SRPMS/xscreensaver-4.24-3.src.rpm and http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SPECS/xscreensaver.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection
Kit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 05:38 EST ---
We need to own the directory itself. Due to we can't use the trailing slash in
form like:
%{_libdir}/jack/
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191239] Review Request: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 05:45 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) Seems to me if you're worried about reproducible builds, really you should be using a controlled chroot environment. (mock) Reproducability of builds is about it working equally well for someone downloading the SRPM to their desktop system and building it there as it does for someone using a clean buildsystem like mock. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189268] Review Request: xscreensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xscreensaver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189268 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 05:49 EST --- Another question: Jamie and me are discussing for releasing 5 now. In the discussion one of the most concerns is about removing some hacks for Fedora packages. Ray, could you tell us why the hacks (in remove-display-modes) were selected to be removed from Fedora packages? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 05:50 EST --- Updated version here: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/jack-audio-connection-kit-0. 101.1-7.src.rpm All changed except %files section, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 173459] Review Request: initng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #128740|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 06:26 EST --- Created an attachment (id=129307) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129307action=view) initng-ifiles 0.0.4-1 spec file New upstreams ifiles. Nothing new in the spec. Biggest change upstreams seem to be that require_network now is gone in favour of a better solution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 180066] Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180066 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug 180066 depends on bug 184199, which changed state. Bug 184199 Summary: It is not possible to build noarch ruby packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184199 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 185423] Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185423 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug 185423 depends on bug 183359, which changed state. Bug 183359 Summary: RFE: upgrade to PEAR 1.4.9 (was: 1.4.7) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183359 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Resolution||ERRATA Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 09:44 EST --- With the patch, the rpm flags are not acknowledged and the include and libdir are hardcoded, so I propose the attaced patch instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192049] Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192049 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 09:46 EST --- Thanks for the speedy review. :) Sorry I missed the upstream update again (In reply to comment #1) * klash is now gnash-klash for the subpackages upstream, this name should be used here also for consistency with what will appear. Ok. * there is a security issue that should be patched in fedora extras package, indeed there is an insecure use of /tmp. If it is too much work, at least there should be a note somewhere. Is there a patch from cvs that can be backported for this? * the documentation should be distributed (see the specfile in the tarball for hints on how to do this), except if there is a good reason not to distribute it? At least manpage and html manual, info files and scrollkeeper files would be bonus Sounds good. I added buildrequires docbook2X for that. (In reply to comment #2) W: gnash devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libgnashasobjs.so W: gnash devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libgnashbackend.so W: gnash devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libgnashgeo.so W: gnash devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libgnashserver.so W: gnash devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libgnashbase.so I removed them for now. There is also this warning that may be problematic, although I don't know how to solve it: E: klash binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib/kde3/libklashpart.so ['/usr/lib', '/usr/lib/qt-3.3/lib'] I added --disable-rpath to configure. * Maybe the gnash package should be in Group: Applications/Multimedia and not in Applications/Internet (the plugins are rightly in Applications/Internet). Thanks, fixed. I also subpackaged the libraries. http://people.redhat.com/petersen/extras/gnash.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/petersen/extras/gnash-0.7.1-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 09:48 EST --- Created an attachment (id=129318) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129318action=view) use variables on make command line to change compilation defaults -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 174952] Review Request: lightning - GNU Lightning
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lightning - GNU Lightning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174952 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187266] Review Request: gprolog - GNU Prolog is a free Prolog compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gprolog - GNU Prolog is a free Prolog compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187266 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192049] Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192049 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 10:54 EST --- Created an attachment (id=129322) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129322action=view) use patch to skip install-info error -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192049] Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192049 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 10:56 EST --- Created an attachment (id=129323) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129323action=view) don't stop on install-info errors during staged install -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 11:04 EST --- Hi Patrice, that certainly is an improvement -- thank you! And here are the updated files: http://mitgcm.org/eh3/fedora_misc/scrip-1.4-4.src.rpm http://mitgcm.org/eh3/fedora_misc/scrip.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 11:12 EST --- Am I missing something? There is no %files section in the spec so I get an Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: error. Does the updated kmodtool create the %files section? (I'm new to the Extras packaging process). I'm using FC5 with with fedora-kmodhelper from fedora-rpmdevtools 1.5-1.fc5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190000] Review Request: partimage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: partimage https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 11:14 EST --- This blocks FC-REVIEW and not FE-REVIEW. This seems wrong. So the correct number to block would be 163778 instead of 188267. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 11:31 EST --- (In reply to comment #30) Am I missing something? There is no %files section in the spec so I get an Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: error. Does the updated kmodtool create the %files section? (I'm new to the Extras packaging process). I'm using FC5 with with fedora-kmodhelper from fedora-rpmdevtools 1.5-1.fc5 The %files section is generated by the kmodtool. The spec should be using the kmodtool script that is in the SRPM. I just tested rebuilding the SRPM on FC5 with kernel 2.6.16-1.2111_FC5 and the build completed just fine. There's a new version of zaptel due within a few days so I'll be updating the SRPM with the new version. At that time I'll make sure that the spec conforms to the latest revison of the kernel module guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 11:36 EST --- Yep ... I'm dumb. It built just fine without me mucking around with the spec :) I was trying to use the fedora-kmodhelper instead. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191200] Review Request: lvm2-cluster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lvm2-cluster https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 11:50 EST --- Can't build on FC5 either, as you have a requirement of device-mapper = 1.02.07, however the latest package in FC5+updates is device-mapper-1.02.02-3.2. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 12:39 EST --- * rpmlint is silent * naming is good * follow packaging guidelines * licence acceptable and included * spec legible * source match upstream * everything else is fine * builds in mock APPROVED comments: * the timestamp of the sources is wrong, I find it better to have the right timestamp. In general I use spectool to achive that (or maybe wget -N). * the executables in grids/ may be compiled and distributed maybe with scrip_ prefixed, and in that case the README file may also be added, renamed for example README.utils. * the bugs file could be in %docs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191622] Review Request: perl-Expect - Expect for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Expect - Expect for Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191622 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 12:51 EST --- Thanks for the review. Imported and built for FC-5 and devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191623] Review Request: perl-Expect-Simple - Wrapper around the Expect module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Expect-Simple - Wrapper around the Expect module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191623 Bug 191623 depends on bug 191622, which changed state. Bug 191622 Summary: Review Request: perl-Expect - Expect for Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191622 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191623] Review Request: perl-Expect-Simple - Wrapper around the Expect module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Expect-Simple - Wrapper around the Expect module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191623 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 12:55 EST --- Thanks for the review. Imported and built for FC-5 and devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191624] Review Request: perl-Test-Expect - Automated driving and testing of terminal-based programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Expect - Automated driving and testing of terminal-based programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191624 Bug 191624 depends on bug 191623, which changed state. Bug 191623 Summary: Review Request: perl-Expect-Simple - Wrapper around the Expect module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191623 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 13:08 EST --- Did anyone notice that the license is not BSD as indicated in the spec? I believe it is free according to the Open Source Definition, but the text certainly does not resemble the BSD license text and the derivative works clause: If SOFTWARE is modified to produce derivative works, such modified SOFTWARE should be clearly marked, so as not to confuse it with the version available from Los Alamos National Laboratory. is not present in the BSD license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 13:26 EST --- Hi Jason, you're right that its not exactly BSD. It does appear to be sufficiently open in that it allows modification, redistribution, sale, etc. So I think the licesnse terms are perfectly acceptable for inclusion in FE. The only question that remains is what should we call the license? I'll be happy to change the license name in the spec before it gets built and pushed (it was just imported). What would you folks like to call it? Woiuld the SCRIP License be OK? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 14:17 EST --- Good: * Tar in source RPM is the same as upstream * Local build work fine * Mock build worde fine. Bad: - Duplicate BuildRequires: SDL-devel (by SDL_mixer-devel) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192119] New: Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192119 Summary: Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/tuxkart.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/tuxkart-0.4.0-1.src.rpm Description: 3D go-kart racing game for kids with several famous OpenSource mascots participating. Race as Tux against 3 computer players in 6 different fun race courses (Standard race track, Dessert, Mathclass, etc). Full information on how to add your own race courses is included. During the race you can pick up powerups such as: (homing) missiles, magnets and portable zippers. Note, You need a plib build with the patch attached to bug 192086 because of the fullscreen support I've added. This really is not a game to play in a window. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192119] Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192119 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||192086 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189603] Review Request: libgalago
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libgalago https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189603 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 14:28 EST --- Built for FC5 devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: elektra
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 14:28 EST ---
blockers:
* changelog
* source not found
* .so for libelekra should be in a devel package
rpmlint output:
W: elektra incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.6.1-3 0.6.1-30
E: elektra invalid-soname /lib/libelektra-filesys.so libelektra-filesys.so
E: elektra invalid-soname /lib/libelektra-fstab.so libelektra-fstab.so
W: elektra wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/elektra-0.6.1/standards/signature.xml
W: elektra devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libelektratools.so
W: elektra devel-file-in-non-devel-package /lib/libelektra.so
W: elektra devel-file-in-non-devel-package /lib/libelektra-default.so
E: elektra script-without-shellbang
/usr/share/doc/elektra-0.6.1/scripts/convert-hwconfKudzu
other comments:
* --prefix=%{_prefix} and --exec-prefix=/ were unneeded in my tests
* The redundant %doc line is not needed in devel subpackage:
%doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog README INSTALL
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189609] Review Request: galago-daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: galago-daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189609 Bug 189609 depends on bug 189603, which changed state. Bug 189603 Summary: Review Request: libgalago https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189603 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191594] Review Request: gtkglextmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtkglextmm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191594 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 14:47 EST --- The release tag is incremented. Here are now the new URLs : Spec URL: http://jaile.ath.cx/gilles/fedora_core_5/gtkglextmm.spec SRPM URL: http://jaile.ath.cx/gilles/fedora_core_5/gtkglextmm-1.2.0-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192124] New: Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192124 Summary: Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/exiv2.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/exiv2-0.9.1-2.src.rpm Description: Exiv2 comprises of a C++ library and a command line utility to access image metadata. Exiv2 supports full read and write access to th Exif and Iptc metadata, Exif MakerNote support, extract and delete methods for Exif thumbnails, classes to access Ifd and so on. The command line utility allow you to: * print the Exif metadata of Jpeg images as summary info, interpreted values, or the plain data for each tag (here is a sample) * print the Iptc metadata of Jpeg images * print the Jpeg comment of Jpeg images * set, add and delete Exif and Iptc metadata of Jpeg images * adjust the Exif timestamp (that's how it all started...) * rename Exif image files according to the Exif timestamp * extract, insert and delete Exif metadata, Iptc metadata and Jpeg comments * extract, insert and delete the thumbnail image embedded in the Exif metadata -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192124] Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192124 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||191784 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 15:00 EST --- I don't think it corresponds to any existing license, but I agree that it's certainly free enough. (Item 4 of the Open Source Definition allows requiring the marking or renaming of derivative works.) Are there other packages which use the same license? If not, SCRIP License is probably fine but you'll have to endure the rpmlint warning. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189375] Re-Review Request: Maelstrom: space combat game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Re-Review Request: Maelstrom: space combat game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189375 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 15:07 EST --- Doesn't mean it needs to be in the package. I'll hit up extras-list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192124] Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192124 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 15:40 EST --- See below- Rpmlint output. OK - Package name. OK - Spec file name matches. OK - Package guidelines. OK - Licsense. (GPL) OK - License field matches in spec. OK - License included in files OK - Spec in american english OK - Spec legible OK - Md5sum of source from upstream 4c6593751368f5e9235d85e0d4058e67 exiv2-0.9.1.tar.gz 4c6593751368f5e9235d85e0d4058e67 exiv2-0.9.1.tar.gz.1 OK - Compiles and builds on one arch at least. (devel in mock) OK - No Forbidden buildrequires included OK - All required buildrequires included OK - Ldconfig in post/postun if including libs. OK - Owns all directories it creates. OK - No duplicate files in %files listing. See below - Permissions on files correct. OK - Clean section correct. OK - Macros consistant. OK - Code not content. OK - Docs must not affect runtime. OK - Header files/libs in a devel package. OK - .so files in devel package. OK - Devel package requires base package. OK - No .la files. OK - Doesn't own any files/dirs that are already owned by others. OK - Package builds in mock. See below - - Docs subpackage needed for large documentations. issues: 1. The description doesn't scan in some places. Might be reworked? Perhaps something like: -Exiv2 comprises of a C++ library and a command line utility to access image -metadata. Exiv2 supports full read and write access to th Exif and Iptc +Exiv2 consists of a C++ library and a command line utility to access image +metadata. Exiv2 supports full read and write access to the Exif and Iptc metadata, Exif MakerNote support, extract and delete methods for Exif thumbnails, classes to access Ifd and so on. -The command line utility allow you to: +The command line utility allows you to: * print the Exif metadata of Jpeg images as summary info, interpreted values, -or the plain data for each tag (here is a sample) +or the plain data for each tag * print the Iptc metadata of Jpeg images * print the Jpeg comment of Jpeg images * set, add and delete Exif and Iptc metadata of Jpeg images * adjust the Exif timestamp (that's how it all started...) * rename Exif image files according to the Exif timestamp -* extract, insert and delete Exif metadata, Iptc metadata and Jpeg comments -* extract, insert and delete the thumbnail image embedded in the Exif metadata +* extract, insert and delete Exif metadata (including thumbnails), +Iptc metadata and Jpeg comments 2. 2 lines of rpmlint output: W: exiv2 unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/libexiv2-0.9.1.so Suggest: This file is mode 644, should be 755 so rpm can strip it/make proper debuginfo? E: exiv2 binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/exiv2 ['/usr/lib'] Suggest: add --disable-rpath to configure? 3. Might be worth moving the /usr/share/doc/exiv2-devel-0.9.1/html/ to a -doc subpackage? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 173459] Review Request: initng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 15:41 EST --- with 0.0.4 ifiles and cleanly regenned runlevels the agettys dont spawn for me. just investigating the problem. can anyone confirm? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191998] Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scrip -- spherical coordinate interpolation and remapping package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 15:42 EST --- Hi Patrice and Jason, thank you for the patch and speedy reviews! I've incorporated almost all of your changes and will, as soon as I get some more free time, add the SCRIP/grids and namelist files. The package built successfully on devel and FC-4/5 branches have been requested. Thanks again! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189609] Review Request: galago-daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: galago-daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189609 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 16:11 EST --- - rpmlint checks return: W: galago-daemon non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/galago-daemon.conf A non-executable file in your package is being installed in /etc, but is not a configuration file. All non-executable files in /etc should be configuration files. Mark the file as %config in the spec file. W: galago-daemon non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec Non standard but not without precedent. I'm inclined to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on FC5 (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 16:57 EST --- This is Episode I of the Blob Wars Saga. So where will I find Episode II? ;) There is a stray export in the %build section. Leftover from debugging perhaps? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192144] New: Review Request: musicbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192144 Summary: Review Request: musicbox Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/musicbox/musicbox.spec SRPM URL: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/musicbox/musicbox-0.2.3-1.src.rpm Description: Musicbox is a simple one-file-at-a-time audio tag editor. It can edit ID3, Vorbis and FLAC tags via the TagLib library. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 17:08 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Bad: - Duplicate BuildRequires: SDL-devel (by SDL_mixer-devel) Your right, but thats a minor issue, I'll fix it after import, or in a second release / attempt if more issue are found during a proper review. (In reply to comment #2) This is Episode I of the Blob Wars Saga. So where will I find Episode II? ;) Episode II isn't finished yet but its undergoing active development and a functional demo is downloadable: http://www.parallelrealities.co.uk/blobAndConquer.php There is a stray export in the %build section. Leftover from debugging perhaps? My bad, it had an export CFLAGS= then I thought I could just as well pass that directly to make, so I cut and pasted it to the make line and appearantly forgot to remove the export. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192144] Review Request: musicbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: musicbox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192144 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192119] Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192119 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 17:21 EST --- So far I've had no problems building this with the plib patch. I don't feel like mucking around with my mock build configurations to add a patched plib package, so I'll do a review of this without running mock builds. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 173459] Review Request: initng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 17:22 EST --- #274 tested head and its already fixed there -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 17:28 EST --- I've got a heavily updated version here: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/mpich2-1.0.3-1.fc5.src.rpm How do we want to proceed? Deji - do you still want to be the maintainer? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 18:33 EST --- This just documents several configure warnings. A future comment will deal with problems in perl and bash plugins. Configure warnings [1] checking for rc_read_config in -lradiusclient... no configure: WARNING: Skipping radius plugin configure: WARNING: install radius libs to compile this plugin (see REQUIREMENTS). [2] checking for lmstat... no configure: WARNING: Get lmstat from Globetrotter Software to monitor flexlm licenses [3] configure: WARNING: Tried /usr/bin/perl - install Net::SNMP perl module if you want to use the perl snmp plugins [4] checking for quakestat... no checking for qstat... no configure: WARNING: Get qstat from http://www.activesw.com/people/steve/qstat.html in order to make check_game plugin [5] checking for qmail-qstat... no configure: WARNING: Could not find qmail-qstat or eqivalent [1] disables the check_radius binary plugin (not built) [2] comercial product the perl plugin - check_flexlm - will not work as expected [3] two perl plugins being removed perl-Net-SNMP review ticket #191628 [4] disables the check_game binary plugin (not built) http://www.qstat.org/ [5] no binary distribution of qmail the check_mailq perl plugin won't be able to check qmail queues Note: Another plugin that appears to be disabled is the check_ide_smart (.c) At least [1], [3], and [4] should be added to a TODO list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191130] Review Request: kmobiletools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kmobiletools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191130 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 18:42 EST --- As a mobile phone user, I think this would be a great tool to add. I am trying moto4lin which works with my Motorla phone but it would be better to have a full tools available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 18:43 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) I've got a heavily updated version here: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/mpich2-1.0.3-1.fc5.src.rpm I can't each the above file How do we want to proceed? Deji - do you still want to be the maintainer? Actually, i have another heavily updated version somewhere too. But it can't go in until openmpi/lam gets re-worked a bit (to allow for their co-existence). Hopefully i submit patches for openmpi and lam by weekend and try to get this moving forward. ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/mpich2/mpich2-1.0.3-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 18:59 EST --- Missing requirements in perl plugins The perl module - utils.pm - as the following lines modified by the configure script (utils.sh also has similar lines). ## updated by autoconf $PATH_TO_RPCINFO = /usr/sbin/rpcinfo ; $PATH_TO_NTPDATE = /usr/sbin/ntpdate ; $PATH_TO_NTPDC = /usr/sbin/ntpdc ; $PATH_TO_NTPQ= /usr/sbin/ntpq ; $PATH_TO_LMSTAT = ; $PATH_TO_SMBCLIENT = /usr/bin/smbclient ; $PATH_TO_MAILQ = /usr/bin/mailq; $PATH_TO_QMAIL_QSTAT = ; and these variables are used by some of the perl plugins. For example, the check_ntp should require the ntp package Code used by in the check_ntp plugin - my $ntpdate = $utils::PATH_TO_NTPDATE; my $ntpq= $utils::PATH_TO_NTPQ; ... open (NTPDATE, $ntpdate . -q $host 21 |) ... open(NTPQ, $ntpq . -np $host 21 |) Plugins with missing requirements: * nagios-plugins-mailq should require the /usr/bin/mailq file (or sendmail (?)) * nagios-plugins-ntp should require the ntp package (or the above ntp utilities) * nagios-plugins-disk_smb should require the samba-client package or the /usr/bin/smbclient binary Directory ownership the nagios-plugins base rpm should also own the /usr/lib/nagios/plugins/ directory -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189656] Review Request: lilypond - A typesetting system for music notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lilypond - A typesetting system for music notation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189656 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 20:26 EST --- OK, I have fixed the encoding and buildrequires issues and have bundled the tarball containing the documentation, from which I'm creating a -doc package. The SRPM is now 28 MB, which bigger than the space I had available, so I'm putting this on my own web server, which is unfortunately behind a 128 KB connection, so it is a long download. You may have better luck just getting the spec and downloading the other source tarball from upstream. Anyway, the new spec and SRPM can be found at: http://qspencer.homeip.net/rpm/ The large documentation package does raise one issue: it seems a subpackage can't be noarch if the main package isn't, so we'll have these large -doc packages for each arch, which seems wasteful. Looking around core and extras, it seems some projects actually create a separate SRPM so the docs can be noarch. I'm not sure whether that makes sense here or not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: unifdef https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 20:39 EST --- Removed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189013] Review Request: python-sqlalchemy - Modular and flexible ORM library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-sqlalchemy - Modular and flexible ORM library for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189013 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 20:57 EST --- rpmlint and I are happy now. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192164] New: Review Request: perl-Socket6 - IPv6 related part of the C socket.h defines and structure manipulators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192164 Summary: Review Request: perl-Socket6 - IPv6 related part of the C socket.h defines and structure manipulators Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Socket6.spec SRPM URL: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Socket6-0.19-2.src.rpm Description: This module supports getaddrinfo() and getnameinfo() to intend to enable protocol independent programing. If your environment supports IPv6, IPv6 related defines such as AF_INET6 are included. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191628] Review Request: perl-Net-SNMP - Object oriented interface to SNMP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-SNMP - Object oriented interface to SNMP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191628 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 21:58 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Just a note: The socket6 license seems to be straight new BSD to me and should be acceptable for Extras. Compare the license text in http://search.cpan.org/src/UMEMOTO/Socket6-0.19/README with http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php. Crypt::Rijndael builds but fails tests on x86_64. It looks to be unmaintained in any case. Tibbs, Thanks for the license information and the building report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191130] Review Request: kmobiletools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kmobiletools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191130 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 23:18 EST --- kmobiletools doesnt do everything. it does not provide a way to put pictures and files on you phone or to take them off. It allows you to manage sms and phone book -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-17 23:59 EST --- ok, spec and src.rpm have been updated to take the best of both. I've also been offered the job of maintaining the upstream spec (which should be the same thing as this one). Spec URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/rsnapshot/rsnapshot.spec SRPM URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/rsnapshot/rsnapshot-1.2.3-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191628] Review Request: perl-Net-SNMP - Object oriented interface to SNMP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-SNMP - Object oriented interface to SNMP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191628 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 00:13 EST --- * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 0e717723f843ab22a93248833f3ebff7 Net-SNMP-5.2.0.tar.gz 0e717723f843ab22a93248833f3ebff7 Net-SNMP-5.2.0.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=3, Tests=28, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.20 cusr + 0.03 csys = 0.23 CPU) * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192119] Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192119
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 01:18 EST ---
One last important note which I forgot: you need to add -DXF86VIDMODE to the
CXXFLAGS when compiling plib with this patch, so the new configure line should
become:
%configure CXXFLAGS=%{optflags} -fPIC -DXF86VIDMODE
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191782] Review Request: rafkill - Top-down shooter with powerups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rafkill - Top-down shooter with powerups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191782 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 01:21 EST --- - rpmlint checks return clean - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on FC5 (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file - works! APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
