[Bug 973041] Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Build - Module::Build extension for CPANPLUS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973041 --- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- Waiting on unblocking the package https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5632. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wFyEdu6Xyva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973041] Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Build - Module::Build extension for CPANPLUS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973041 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Build New Branches: f19 Owners: ppisar jplesnik psabata InitialCC: perl-sig I changed my mind. I need new branch only for F19 in addition. The code will be provided as perl.spec sub-package in older Fedoras to match perl-CPANPLUS package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Bd1bv9x4asa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915005] Review Request: qt5-qttools - Qt5 - QtTool components
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915005 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(gre...@freenet.de | |) | Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #25 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- sure, but you haven't responded to my bundling note regarding clucene. (In reply to Rex Dieter from comment #24) (I see the review flag isn't set, if you want to continue, please set to ?, thanks). ah, I always forget that -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3jsmc3M2fya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973159] Review Request: libguac-client-ssh - SSH support for guacd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973159 --- Comment #2 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- Hello, thanks for the review. If you want any other review in return please let me know. (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #1) libguac-client-ssh.src: E: description-line-too-long C libguac-client-ssh is a protocol support plugin for the Guacamole proxy (guacd) which Your description lines must not exceed 80 characters. If a line is exceeding this number, cut it to fit in two lines. Fixed. $ licensecheck -r * ltmain.sh: GPL (v2 or later) src/ibar.c: MPL (v1.1) GPL (unversioned/unknown version) As licensecheck says, we have MPL v1.1 or GPL without versioning. I cannot find the future versions clause anywhere, and nowhere LGPL. Well, the original website stated that each module of the guacamole stack [1] is triple licensed. Unfortunately the website has change and I can't find the page anymore. Is it ok for the following? License: MPLv1.1 or GPLv2+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=N6J29NVWSHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973159] Review Request: libguac-client-ssh - SSH support for guacd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973159 --- Comment #3 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- Oops, did not paste the link for the other bits: [1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/search?match=globtype=packageterms=*guac* -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Qbbww1N0dWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973159] Review Request: libguac-client-ssh - SSH support for guacd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973159 --- Comment #4 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- Well, according to [1] the unversioned GNU General Public License (no version) should be GPL+; so it should be; License: MPLv1.1 or GPL+ Spec URL: http://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/libguac-client-ssh.spec SRPM URL: http://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/libguac-client-ssh-0.8.0-2.fc19.src.rpm I will also check and fix the other guacamole packages. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Good_Licenses -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CFUrKAY4ava=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821283] Review Request: gsbase - A collection of java utility classes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821283 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IkRhU5BNUia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 822832] Review Request: josql - Library to apply SQL-like syntax to Java objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822832 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=P4iceZdF1Ua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973084] Review Request: htmlcleaner - HtmlCleaner is open-source HTML parser written in Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973084 --- Comment #4 from marcin.du...@gmail.com --- The https://fedorahosted.org/packager-sponsors/ticket/69 step is blocking me for almost a day now -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=omqn5GKnI9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882704] Review Request: otopi - oVirt Task Oriented Pluggable Installer/Implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882704 --- Comment #8 from Alon Bar-Lev alo...@redhat.com --- Hello Douglas, spec file is at upstream[1]. I will be happy if you can send patches to whatever you think that should be improved. Thanks, Alon [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=otopi.git;a=blob;f=otopi.spec.in;hb=HEAD -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=h15w6Pgxa0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882711] Review Request: ovirt-host-deploy - oVirt host deploy tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882711 --- Comment #6 from Alon Bar-Lev alo...@redhat.com --- Hello Douglas, spec file is at upstream[1]. I will be happy if you can send patches to whatever you think that should be improved. Thanks, Alon [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-host-deploy.git;a=blob;f=ovirt-host-deploy.spec.in;hb=HEAD -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cA3ZOJNnMca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973084] Review Request: htmlcleaner - HtmlCleaner is open-source HTML parser written in Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973084 --- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- Please show a little bit of patience. It's a ticketing system with human volunteers working on those tasks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CZlKFEIwzCa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] New: Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 Bug ID: 973562 Summary: Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mgold...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/aesh/1/aesh.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/aesh/1/aesh-0.33.3-1.fc19.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: goldmann Description: Æsh is a Java library for handling console input with the goal to support most GNU Readline features. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5494910 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QVhv1MLbD2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mWb7z2NOMba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972719] Review Request: nicstat - prints out network statistics for all network interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972719 Yaniv Bronhaim bronh...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bronh...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Yaniv Bronhaim bronh...@gmail.com --- Hey, 1. Please remove redundant comment lines: #BuildRequires: #Requires: 2. The URL that specified in README.txt (http://blogs.sun.com/timc/entry/nicstat_the_solaris_and_linux) doesn't work 3. Just wondering why the initial version starts as 1.92-1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hrBkVkBMuXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972477] Review Request: fido - A multi-threaded file watch utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972477
--- Comment #9 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Björn Esser from comment #8)
[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
--- {C,LD}FLAGS possibly ignored by Makefile; GOT is still writeable
caused by partial RELRO, complete RELRO needs
`-Wl,-z,relro,-z,now`
doesn't build PIE, although %global _hardened_build 1 is in spec
`hardening-check --verbose fido`
fido:
Position Independent Executable: no, normal executable!
...
Immediate binding: no, not found!
see attached build.log
Upstream's way to build the binary is the key to this: Makefile compiles a
STATIC-lib and links this into the sbin-exec, which makes real, useful
hardening impossible. Static libs can't be build as PIE and linked with
-z,now, afaik.
You should work out a way, with upstream, avoiding this static-lib during
build; either it should build a shlib and link this or just building the
sbin-exec from all single objects.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=yJpQsHUxGna=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 915006] Review Request: qt5-qtwebkit - Qt5 - QtWebKit components
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915006 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(gre...@freenet.de | |) | --- Comment #24 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- Created attachment 760028 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=760028action=edit pre-review sorry for the late response. lets try to finish this whats left: - some (internal?) libs are defining rpaths - unspecific license tag: actually most of the code is LGPL and BSD; I've also spotted some apache, MIT, ISC and MPL files (see licensecheck). Since this is basically a copy of webkit I also don't think the qt license terms do really apply here (# See also http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5.0/qtdoc/licensing.html;) - include ChangeLog and VERSION (there is no license file, is it?) thanks for your effort -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VDQx0kQBWha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576
Tomas Radej tra...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||tra...@redhat.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tra...@redhat.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Tomas Radej tra...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
hsqldb1-javadoc
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
BSD (3 clause), Unknown or generated. 2 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/tradej/reviews/970576-hsqldb1/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Java:
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
Maven:
[x]: Pom files have correct add_maven_depmap call
Note: Some add_maven_depmap calls found. Please check if they are correct
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even
when building with ant
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir}
[Bug 972719] Review Request: nicstat - prints out network statistics for all network interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972719 --- Comment #2 from Tomasz Torcz zdzi...@irc.pl --- Created attachment 760055 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=760055action=edit changes to nicstat.spec Spec URL: http://ttorcz.fedorapeople.org/nicstat.spec SRPM URL: http://ttorcz.fedorapeople.org/nicstat-1.92-2.fc18.src.rpm 1) corrected 2) indeed, proper URL is now https://blogs.oracle.com/timc/entry/nicstat_the_solaris_and_linux Should I patch the README? Or provide README.Fedora with new URL? 3) I just wasn't packaged previously. The utilitty itself is being developed since 2009. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Ns8zDsrGvba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972719] Review Request: nicstat - prints out network statistics for all network interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972719 --- Comment #3 from Yaniv Bronhaim bronh...@gmail.com --- As part of 1.92-2 you should modify the README file. And if you already modify it you should also: 1. split the README and AUTHORS, it's more common. 2. remove the .txt suffix (also from LICENSE.txt and ChangeLog.txt) 3. Make the spec URL fits the README URL. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=evZ9TGrqxca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971103] Review Request: bsd-mailx - Simple mail user agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971103 --- Comment #9 from Peter Schiffer pschi...@redhat.com --- Douglas, listing 24 non-redhat patches doesn't make .spec file clear and simple, in my opinion. Upstream is Debian, which is not dead. Not actively developed means no new features are added any more, but critical bugs and security issues are fixed by them, so there is no problem. I meant that I don't expect the upstream source code to be updated very often. Anyway, thank you for your part of the review. peter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Tuw2vQhgJ0a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|punto...@libero.it Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iUKciFOLnXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in aesh-
javadoc
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Unknown or generated. 106 files have unknown license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Java:
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It is
pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even
when building with ant
[x]: Pom files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir} instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
[Bug 973084] Review Request: htmlcleaner - HtmlCleaner is open-source HTML parser written in Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973084 --- Comment #6 from marcin.du...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #5) Please show a little bit of patience. It's a ticketing system with human volunteers working on those tasks. OK -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=H0pIENQuW8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 965007] Review Request: gedit-trailsave - Gedit plugin who strip trailing whitespace on save
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965007 --- Comment #8 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- As far as I can see in spec, it's basically unchanged since you reported for review. Please add the changes proposed by Germán in comment #1 and comment #2. I'll start full review then. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ci2dAXfTxaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com --- Thanks for review! I think you misunderstood the dist tag requirement. The dist tag in my spec file is present and this is how it should be, according to guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag Package will be updated once a new version of WildFly will require it. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: aesh Short Description: Another Extendable SHell Owners: goldmann -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0I3O0xfcVda=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971103] Review Request: bsd-mailx - Simple mail user agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971103 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #10 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- (In reply to Peter Schiffer from comment #9) Douglas, listing 24 non-redhat patches doesn't make .spec file clear and simple, in my opinion. Upstream is Debian, I agree with Douglas - We should not inherit packages from secondary sources but from primary sources. According to http://ftp-master.metadata.debian.org/changelogs/main/b/bsd-mailx/unstable_changelog upstream is OpenBSD. Anyway, http://ftp.de.debian.org/ is the German mirror of the Debian package repositories. The generic Url would be ftp://ftp.debian.org. However, the actual Debian sources are in Debian's git: git://anonscm.debian.org/users/robert/bsd-mailx.git (c.f. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/robert/bsd-mailx.git) Also, Debian's git is telling their package received its last change 2011-11-20. To me, this doesn't sound more maintained than the OpenBSD upstream. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2ae93hXba5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971224] Review Request: python-modargs - A CLI library that infers arguments from functions in a module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971224 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zxzEAtkMRMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971224] Review Request: python-modargs - A CLI library that infers arguments from functions in a module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971224 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=s43QHlBE4Ha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973041] Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Build - Module::Build extension for CPANPLUS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973041 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cqn5ZKweASa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973041] Review Request: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Build - Module::Build extension for CPANPLUS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973041 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FxUOEeRdiTa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #759719|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #8 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 760120 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=760120action=edit fix build with boost = 1.53.0 This should fix build. Changed things are backport-compatible with previous boost-versions = 1.40.0 Please update and I'll take a new review run. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8k5L8rlQ2Za=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=886zuuH2pCa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=dK40Nu3AZga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RvjbCDoPrUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=lSNqjy6KsBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- checksec-1.5-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/checksec-1.5-2.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=g96xspkpBta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- checksec-1.5-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/checksec-1.5-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FxJHoYpQT1a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- checksec-1.5-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/checksec-1.5-2.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=lPyRWxxDeHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- checksec-1.5-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/checksec-1.5-2.el5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Od81NArHV3a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 965007] Review Request: gedit-trailsave - Gedit plugin who strip trailing whitespace on save
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965007 --- Comment #9 from Germán Racca gra...@gmail.com --- I'm glad you guys are following my stereotypes :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6hCz2qq2BTa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973562] Review Request: aesh - Another Extendable SHell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973562 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2013-06-12 09:20:44 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=BZJzSU4ssva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970964] Review Request: jboss-annotations-1.2-api - Common Annotations 1.2 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970964 Michal Srb m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||m...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pLEnCRZB5Ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972431] Review Request: airtsp - C++ Simulated Airline Travel Solution Provider Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972431 --- Comment #2 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 760156 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=760156action=edit epstopdf and graphviz are missing for building the auto-docs The autodocs are not build properly caused by missing dot (graphviz), epstopdf (and possibly some more). Please fix and I'll start a new run. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=XiBfzj5YhWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971103] Review Request: bsd-mailx - Simple mail user agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971103 --- Comment #11 from Peter Schiffer pschi...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #10) According to http://ftp-master.metadata.debian.org/changelogs/main/b/bsd-mailx/ unstable_changelog upstream is OpenBSD. Yes, bsd-mailx is from OpenBSD, but without Debian patches, it's unusable on Linux. Anyway, http://ftp.de.debian.org/ is the German mirror of the Debian package repositories. The generic Url would be ftp://ftp.debian.org. I agree with removing the .de from the SourceX tags. However, the actual Debian sources are in Debian's git: git://anonscm.debian.org/users/robert/bsd-mailx.git (c.f. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/robert/bsd-mailx.git) I think, I'll change the URL from http://packages.debian.org/sid/bsd-mailx to http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/bsd-mailx which contains links for both, the tarball and the Debian's git. What do you think? peter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YG0iQvamvWa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973696] New: Review Request: php-pecl-json - Support for JSON serialization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973696 Bug ID: 973696 Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-json - Support for JSON serialization Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fed...@famillecollet.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/remicollet/remirepo/master/php/pecl/php-pecl-json/php-pecl-json.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/SRPMS/php-pecl-json-1.3.1-1.remi.src.rpm Description: The php-Json module will add support for JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) serialization to PHP. This is a dropin alternative to standard PHP JSON extension which use the json-c library parser. Fedora Account System Username: remi Of course, as soon as approved and imported, json extension will be removed from main php package. Target : F = 19 only -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UDmgv3IodIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972477] Review Request: fido - A multi-threaded file watch utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972477 --- Comment #10 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no --- Some of the functions on lib/ are simple/unneeded(?), building a static lib for these seems like overkill. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2zCS41Y7cQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973696] Review Request: php-pecl-jsonc - Support for JSON serialization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973696 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |php-pecl-json - Support for |php-pecl-jsonc - Support |JSON serialization |for JSON serialization --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- php-pecl-jsonc seems a better name (clean upgrade as php-pecl-json is obsoleted in old php version, without version) Spec: https://raw.github.com/remicollet/remirepo/master/php/pecl/php-pecl-jsonc/php-pecl-jsonc.spec SRPM: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/SRPMS/php-pecl-jsonc-1.3.1-1.remi.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8FO3dQvN69a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971103] Review Request: bsd-mailx - Simple mail user agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971103 --- Comment #12 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- I think you should point to OpenBSD sources, not use the Debian tarball and to adopt the Debian patches individually. This is what most other packagers do. They adopt Debian patches, in cases they are sensible, because in longer terms patches tend to diverge and you will end up with patching patches. Besides this, I can not avoid seriously asking whether this package is worth packaging at all, because both OpenBSD upstream and Debian seem to be dormant/ on hiatus. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qQKLPraWo2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970964] Review Request: jboss-annotations-1.2-api - Common Annotations 1.2 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970964
--- Comment #1 from Michal Srb m...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Java:
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even
when building with ant
[x]: Pom files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir} instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in
[Bug 842107] Review Request: sugar-america - Game about the America geography
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=842107 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||NotReady --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu --- Please clear the whiteboard if the package becomes reviewable. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=sQQ7DMOMVQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972431] Review Request: airtsp - C++ Simulated Airline Travel Solution Provider Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972431 --- Comment #3 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org --- (In reply to Björn Esser from comment #2) Created attachment 760156 [details] epstopdf and graphviz are missing for building the auto-docs Done Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/airtsp/airtsp.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/airtsp/airtsp-1.01.0-2.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xUiMgIsxq1a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972431] Review Request: airtsp - C++ Simulated Airline Travel Solution Provider Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972431 --- Comment #4 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Now it's FTBFS on RAWHIDE: Error: No Package found for texlive-utils -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CwD2vWJh4za=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 883362] Review Request: stilts - STOMP messaging framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=883362 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=YC5rqSZMpNa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971103] Review Request: bsd-mailx - Simple mail user agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971103 --- Comment #13 from Peter Schiffer pschi...@redhat.com --- This package is intended only for EPEL6, because we need it as an alternative to the mailx package. Mailx package in RHEL-5 is based on this, bsd-mailx, but in RHEL-6 it's based on heirloom mailx, which is not 100% percent backwards compatible with bsd-mailx. Also there might be a problem with OpenBSD sources, because so far I found only CVS urls for them and no http url, but I can try to look again... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NcEwG7sjJOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #9 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/bookkeeper.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/bookkeeper-4.2.1-1.fc18.src.rpm - applied boost patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=MCtXDOPOYKa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: hsqldb1 Short Description: HyperSQL Database Engine Owners: gil Branches: f18 f19 InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Gab79JCgSGa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 903246] Review Request: cpopen - Creates a subprocess in simpler safer manner
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903246 --- Comment #10 from Yaniv Bronhaim bronh...@gmail.com --- fixed spec: http://bronhaim.fedorapeople.org/python-cpopen-1.2.2-1.fc17.src.rpm http://bronhaim.fedorapeople.org/python-cpopen.spec 1. fixed changelog dates 2. added provides_exclude_from for shared library 3. added doc files to tar -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=he79aRwyVna=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5496273 reporte only these warnings: channel.cpp: In member function 'virtual void Hedwig::AsioDuplexChannel::doConnect(const OperationCallbackPtr)': channel.cpp:536:29: warning: variable 'error' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable] boost::system::error_code error = boost::asio::error::host_not_found; ^ channel.cpp: In member function 'virtual void Hedwig::AsioSSLDuplexChannel::doConnect(const OperationCallbackPtr)': channel.cpp:663:29: warning: variable 'error' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable] boost::system::error_code error = boost::asio::error::host_not_found; -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4MRGYy3KAya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #11 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10) Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5496273 reporte only these warnings: channel.cpp: In member function 'virtual void Hedwig::AsioDuplexChannel::doConnect(const OperationCallbackPtr)': channel.cpp:536:29: warning: variable 'error' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable] boost::system::error_code error = boost::asio::error::host_not_found; ^ channel.cpp: In member function 'virtual void Hedwig::AsioSSLDuplexChannel::doConnect(const OperationCallbackPtr)': channel.cpp:663:29: warning: variable 'error' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable] boost::system::error_code error = boost::asio::error::host_not_found; You can safely ignore these. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JVSip2AanEa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972431] Review Request: airtsp - C++ Simulated Airline Travel Solution Provider Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972431 --- Comment #5 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org --- (In reply to Björn Esser from comment #4) Now it's FTBFS on RAWHIDE: Error: No Package found for texlive-utils Sorry for that (I tested on Fedora 17, as it is the only one available I have under hand right now). The files have been fixed and overwritten (without bumping the version, as it was not building successfully): Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/airtsp/airtsp.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/airtsp/airtsp-1.01.0-2.fc17.src.rpm The build on Rawhide is successful: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5496327 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QIw7UyLZNMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589
--- Comment #12 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
Package has some minor issues, no real blockers, so fixing in SCM will be OK.
#
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Maven packages should use new style packaging
Note: If possible update your package to latest guidelines
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Apache_Maven
--- comment about this in spec and update after F18 EOL
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: These BR are not needed: make
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
--- remove from BR, please
- Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: Missing: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} in libhedwig,
libhedwig-devel, bookkeeper-java
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#RequiringBasePackage
--- false positve: main-pkg is app for running on server.
rest is either docs or libs providing API for client-software.
- libhedwig.x86_64: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libhedwig01.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libboost_system-mt.so.1.53.0
--- get rid of unused-shlib-dep, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#unused-direct-shlib-dependency
AFTER invoking autoreconf invoke:
`sed -i -e 's! -shared ! -Wl,--as-needed\0!g' libtool`
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in libhedwig ,
libhedwig-devel , bookkeeper-java , bookkeeper-javadoc
--- see above
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Apache (v2.0), Unknown or generated, *No copyright* Apache (v2.0).
3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bjoern.esser/fedora/review/948589-bookkeeper/licensecheck.txt
--- License-tag is fine.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 102400 bytes in 8 files.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #13 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Just forgot to set fedora-review(+)... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OC9uFLdGIXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=U8ndYkZNH2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QZZ0kpXobxa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/bookkeeper.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/bookkeeper-4.2.1-1.fc18.src.rpm - removed make form BR - removed unused-shlib-dep, thanks to Björn Esser New Package SCM Request === Package Name: bookkeeper Short Description: Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper Owners: gil Branches: f18 f19 InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ojfLVL506ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 919933] Review Request: python-py2neo - A simple Python library that provides access to Neo4j
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919933 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fUd5GQmUU4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 919937] Review Request: python-testify - A replacement for Python's unittest module and nose
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919937 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2f1oGgBW1wa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8DIJhUcH9ma=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cfDaU1npsFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971049] Review Request: davix - Toolkit for Http-based file management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971049 --- Comment #1 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Update : Koji f19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5496547 Koji f18: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5496559 Koji rawhide hangs forever for unknow reason inside the doxygen generation, this is a strange behavior which does not happens with mock on rawhide. -- mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 davix-0.2.0-1.el5.centos.src.rpm succeed without problem It highly probable that it's a doxygen/koji related bug and not a davix one: davix build on every plateform excepted koji rawhide. Can you proceed the review of davix without considering this problem ? I will try to identify the source of this issue and open a bugzilla ticket if necessary. Adev -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jknOQgAtosa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] New: Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 Bug ID: 973780 Summary: Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org, nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Depends On: 889723 Blocks: 656997 (kde-reviews), 201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #889723 +++ Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/kde-plasma-applicationname.spec SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/kde-plasma-applicationname-1.7g18437d0-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: A QML plasmoid to display the application name of the focused window. Features: * Shows the application name of the focused windows * Shows the activity name if no window is focused * Optionally, it shows the window title (enable this option in the settings) Fedora Account System Username: mariobl I was wondering if kbuildsycoca4 is in the right place. Actually, the instructions at https://github.com/ascarpino/applicationname-plasmoid/wiki/Install append this command to the installation chain. Maybe it has to be launched each time the package is installed or uninstalled? Then I would run it via %post and %postun. Explanations are very welcome. --- Additional comment from Mario Blättermann on 2013-01-26 14:11:42 CET --- I'm no longer interested to maintain this package. Closing it as FE-DEADREVIEW. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RmfEvLLBs4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 889723] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889723 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||973780 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ayOBB4woHca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 889723] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889723 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 973780 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=luwfHIbqpZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 --- Comment #1 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- *** Bug 889723 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=2wGXXXvMF8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|889723 | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=h7z5dqJfY1a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 889723] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889723 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|973780 | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=TDLW03XokTa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 --- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- OK, I'm back again. I can't dispense of this package, so I want to have it in Fedora. The file links are still available. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=me62vsH7Kea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VhMa05i7gZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ozSXra9ESaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com Blocks|201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) | Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bjoern.es...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pHqsN2xxI4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kZdopQWiuya=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780
--- Comment #3 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com ---
First view at spec:
-%global mainver 1.7
-%global gitver 18437d0
-
Name: kde-plasma-applicationname
-Version:%{mainver}g%{gitver}
+Version:1.7
Release:1%{?dist}
Summary:QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused
window
License:LGPLv2+
-URL:https://github.com/ascarpino/applicationname-plasmoid
-# https://github.com/ascarpino/applicationname-plasmoid/tarball/%{mainver}
-Source0:ascarpino-applicationname-plasmoid-1.7-0-g18437d0.tar.gz
+URL: https://github.com/scarpin0/applicationname-plasmoid
+Source0:
https://github.com/scarpin0/applicationname-plasmoid/archive/%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-{version}.tar.gz
Given URL and comment for tarball is invalid (404), according to
http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php/Application%20Name%20Plasmoid?content=154324
it's the mentioned above.
Please fix, and I'll review again.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kP33sV2LY9a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #17 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Fedora Update System from comment #16) hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc19 This is Bug 948589 - Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper! You possibly mixed up bug#? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fKCwEOYVhma=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 972477] Review Request: fido - A multi-threaded file watch utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972477
--- Comment #11 from Roman Mohr ro...@fenkhuber.at ---
(In reply to Björn Esser from comment #9)
(In reply to Björn Esser from comment #8)
[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
--- {C,LD}FLAGS possibly ignored by Makefile; GOT is still writeable
caused by partial RELRO, complete RELRO needs
`-Wl,-z,relro,-z,now`
doesn't build PIE, although %global _hardened_build 1 is in spec
`hardening-check --verbose fido`
fido:
Position Independent Executable: no, normal executable!
...
Immediate binding: no, not found!
see attached build.log
Upstream's way to build the binary is the key to this: Makefile compiles a
STATIC-lib and links this into the sbin-exec, which makes real, useful
hardening impossible. Static libs can't be build as PIE and linked with
-z,now, afaik.
You should work out a way, with upstream, avoiding this static-lib during
build; either it should build a shlib and link this or just building the
sbin-exec from all single objects.
I just discovered a few minutes ago, that siege (also from the same author)
which is already in fedora also includes lib/joedog.
(In reply to Terje Røsten from comment #10)
Some of the functions on lib/ are simple/unneeded(?), building a static lib
for these seems like overkill.
Yes most of these functions are just convenience wrappers of the author, but I
think I have no choice, as the library is also in another package and I already
found critical bugs in there.
(In reply to Björn Esser from comment #8)
[?]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
--- needs check for bundled libs, esp. files with license differing
from upstream
The library is in all of the GPLv2 projects of the author. I have checked them,
they have all the same license in the header.
So I think the cleanest solution is, that I contact the author and the
maintainer of siege and we will create a separate package for the library, what
do you think?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1d78RdIpZ7a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973159] Review Request: libguac-client-ssh - SSH support for guacd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973159
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
New scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5496684
$ rpmlint -i -v *libguac-client-ssh.src: I: checking
libguac-client-ssh.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) guacd - guard
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libguac-client-ssh.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US guacd - guard
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libguac-client-ssh.src: I: checking-url http://guac-dev.org/ (timeout 10
seconds)
libguac-client-ssh.src: I: checking-url
http://guac-dev.org/pub/dist/source/libguac-client-ssh-0.8.0.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
libguac-client-ssh.i686: I: checking
libguac-client-ssh.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) guacd - guard
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libguac-client-ssh.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US guacd - guard
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libguac-client-ssh.i686: I: checking-url http://guac-dev.org/ (timeout 10
seconds)
libguac-client-ssh.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libguac-client-ssh.so
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.
libguac-client-ssh.x86_64: I: checking
libguac-client-ssh.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) guacd - guard
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libguac-client-ssh.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US guacd -
guard
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libguac-client-ssh.x86_64: I: checking-url http://guac-dev.org/ (timeout 10
seconds)
libguac-client-ssh.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/libguac-client-ssh.so
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.
libguac-client-ssh-debuginfo.i686: I: checking
libguac-client-ssh-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://guac-dev.org/
(timeout 10 seconds)
libguac-client-ssh-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking
libguac-client-ssh-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://guac-dev.org/
(timeout 10 seconds)
libguac-client-ssh.spec: I: checking-url
http://guac-dev.org/pub/dist/source/libguac-client-ssh-0.8.0.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
The license is now fully canonical, also the length of the description lines.
OK, here we go:
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
MPLv1.1 or GPL+
[+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
3ba240031304de56e7f48a59c6d40ffdeb0fd7a5bba905d4b289844d645812db
libguac-client-ssh-0.8.0.tar.gz
3ba240031304de56e7f48a59c6d40ffdeb0fd7a5bba905d4b289844d645812db
libguac-client-ssh-0.8.0.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
[Bug 972477] Review Request: fido - A multi-threaded file watch utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972477 --- Comment #12 from Björn Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Roman Mohr from comment #11) I just discovered a few minutes ago, that siege (also from the same author) which is already in fedora also includes lib/joedog. ... The library is in all of the GPLv2 projects of the author. I have checked them, they have all the same license in the header. So I think the cleanest solution is, that I contact the author and the maintainer of siege and we will create a separate package for the library, what do you think? Hello Roman! Nice work! For siege you should follow the instructions from the wiki: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#When_a_Bundled_Library_is_Discovered_Post-Review Yes, you should contact upstream and (if you want to) work with him on shipping a shared lib.so seperated from his other sources. Cheers, Björn -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0iThVYkWo4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973793] New: Review Request: python-martian - A library to grok configuration from Python code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973793 Bug ID: 973793 Summary: Review Request: python-martian - A library to grok configuration from Python code Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fireman...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://firemanxbr.fedorapeople.org/python-martian/python-martian.spec SRPM URL: http://firemanxbr.fedorapeople.org/python-martian/python-martian-0.14-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: A library that allows the embedding of configuration information in Python code. Martian can then grok the system and do the appropriate configuration registrations. One example of a system that uses Martian is the system where it originated: Grok Fedora Account System Username: firemanxbr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cH1oFGBTQqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 965007] Review Request: gedit-trailsave - Gedit plugin who strip trailing whitespace on save
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=965007 --- Comment #10 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com --- I look other Gedit plugin and no plugin is noarch because gedit is not noarch. Gedit take .plugin in /usr/lib64/gedit/plugins and can take other file in /usr/share/gedit plugin. Are you sure for the Germán's recommandation about noarch ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rHIbLWDCZAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 --- Comment #4 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Thanks for your quick response. I will provide new files once I know about how to handle kbuildsycoca. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HzztmvW16aa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973780] Review Request: kde-plasma-applicationname - QML plasmoid to display the application title of the focused window
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973780 --- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- See also https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2013-June/009205.html. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RSX66ocf6Aa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973793] Review Request: python-martian - A library to grok configuration from Python code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973793 Marcelo Barbosa fireman...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3C3Gr1IdE2a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 858127] Review Request: groovy18 - Dynamic language for the Java Platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858127 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- groovy18-1.8.9-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=MP5OL7xsx6a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880387] Review Request: python-pymongo - Python driver for MongoDB
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880387 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-pymongo-2.5.2-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pymongo-2.5.2-1.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=G8Mc2BTWfZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823122] Review Request: zookeeper - A high-performance coordination service for distributed applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823122 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tht2IW9xSTa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823122] Review Request: zookeeper - A high-performance coordination service for distributed applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823122 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- zookeeper-3.4.5-5.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zookeeper-3.4.5-5.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Y2Znd9f3Aga=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3CsmMAEAXqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 970576] Review Request: hsqldb1 - HyperSQL Database Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970576 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hsqldb1-1.8.1.3-1.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=J0NgAxb8Gqa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 948589] Review Request: bookkeeper - Apache BookKeeper sub-project of ZooKeeper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948589 --- Comment #18 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- sorry! yes, fixed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZGvPhXPxuva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 973349] Review Request: checksec - Tool to check system for binary-hardening
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973349 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- checksec-1.5-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=F7vqQ3DUbea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
