[Bug 1908338] Review Request: php-pecl-couchbase3 - Couchbase Server PHP extension
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908338 --- Comment #3 from Remi Collet --- Updated to 3.1.0 https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/php/pecl/php-pecl-couchbase3.git/commit/?h=fedora=5861bbda0c68b0341ae8c5e11e80872c0287de51 Spec URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/temp/php-pecl-couchbase3.spec SRPM URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/temp/php-pecl-couchbase3-3.1.0-1.fedora.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1912143] Review Request: python-dataclasses - An implementation of PEP 557: Data Classes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912143 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-01-21 00:33:41 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-202aed656b has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917986] Review Request: xrdb - X resource database utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917986 Adam Jackson changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: -| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1888974] Review Request: golang-github-enescakir-emoji - A minimalistic emoji package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1888974 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-01-20 22:01:50 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1918394] Review Request: steinberg-petaluma-fonts - Petaluma music font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918394 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Fixed In Version||steinberg-petaluma-fonts-1. ||055-1.20190129gitc7a3e8e.fc ||34 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2021-01-20 21:28:45 --- Comment #3 from Jerry James --- Built in Rawhide. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 476234] Review Request: mindi-busybox - Busybox version suited for Mindi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476234
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #29 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Use %global not %define
%global srcname mindi-busybox
- Release should start at 1. Also please explain the extra release parameters:
Release:0.20201126002730.s3777M%{dist}
- This ned to be justified usually:
# Cf: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588550
ExcludeArch:ppc
We don't support ppc anymore, only ppc64le.
- Please justify this or fix the package to make debuginfo work:
# Avoids to generate debug packages
%global debug_package %{nil}
The issue seems to be that busybox is stripped by the build process:
strip -s --remove-section=.note --remove-section=.comment \
busybox_unstripped -o busybox
- Please provide the patch unzipped:
Patch0: 02-stime.fedora-33.gz
- Please add a comment explaining what the patch does or why it is needed
Not needed:
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%defattr(-,root,root)
- The license file must be included with %license in %files:
%doc ChangeLog AUTHORS README TODO NEWS
%license LICENSE
- Add a BR for make
- Use %make_build instead of make X
- Use %set_build_flags before make to use Fedora build flags
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901052] Review Request: j4-dmenu-desktop - Generic menu for desktop managers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901052 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Florek --- New link to spec and SRPM. Spec URL: https://gitlab.com/ibotty/j4-dmenu-desktop-rpm-spec/-/raw/main/j4-dmenu-desktop.spec?inline=false SRPM URL: https://gitlab.com/ibotty/j4-dmenu-desktop-rpm-spec/-/raw/spec-file/j4-dmenu-desktop-2.18-2.fc33.src.rpm?inline=false -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901114] Review Request: rust-pam - wrappers for PAM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901114 --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- You should bump the dep to rpassword to 5 if possible -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901116] Review Request: rust-syslog - send messages to syslog
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901116 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1901118 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901118 [Bug 1901118] Review Request: rust-pleaser - user execution with regex configuration -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901118] Review Request: rust-pleaser - user execution with regex configuration
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901118 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com Depends On||1901116, 1901114 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Not useful: [dependencies.chrono] -version = "0.4.11" +version = "0.4" - Why do you downgrade rpassword: [dependencies.rpassword] -version = "5.0.0" +version = "4.0" Add a comment above the patch explaining what you have changed. - You must include the license file with %license in %files devel Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901114 [Bug 1901114] Review Request: rust-pam - wrappers for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901116 [Bug 1901116] Review Request: rust-syslog - send messages to syslog -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901114] Review Request: rust-pam - wrappers for PAM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901114 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1901118 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901118 [Bug 1901118] Review Request: rust-pleaser - user execution with regex configuration -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901116] Review Request: rust-syslog - send messages to syslog
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901116 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - You must include the license file with %license in %files devel - You must include a comment describing what the patch is for and link to an upstream merge request if needed: Patch0: syslog-fix-test.diff - License ok - Latest version packaged - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1918394] Review Request: steinberg-petaluma-fonts - Petaluma music font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918394 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/steinberg-petaluma-fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901052] Review Request: j4-dmenu-desktop - Generic menu for desktop managers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901052 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Florek --- Thank you for the review! I fixed all things I could fix. Unfortunately, I don't control upstream, so I cannot fix the source tarball name. I agree that this name is pretty bad. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901114] Review Request: rust-pam - wrappers for PAM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901114 --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Please explain your patches in a comment and provide upstream PR you have made # Initial patched metadata # Bump X to X, link to upstream PR Patch0: pam-fix-metadata.diff # Fix XXX Patch1: pam-fix-authenticator.diff - You must include the license files with %license in %files devel: %files devel %license LICENSE-APACHE LICENSE-MIT - You should include CHANGELOG.md in %doc %doc CHANGELOG.md README.md - Build fails: Error: Problem: nothing provides requested (crate(rpassword/default) >= 4.0.0 with crate(rpassword/default) < 5.0.0~) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901106] Review Request: rust-pam-sys - FFI rust crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901106
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- You need to add a Requires for pam in the devel subpackage:
%packagedevel
Summary:%{summary}
BuildArch: noarch
Requires: pam-devel
%descriptiondevel %{_description}
- You should BuildRequires pam-devel like this:
%generate_buildrequires
%cargo_generate_buildrequires
echo 'pam-devel'
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901106] Review Request: rust-pam-sys - FFI rust crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901106 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - You should specify what you patched in a comment: # Initial patched metadata # Bump blah to X, PR: https://... Patch0: pam-sys-fix-metadata.diff Patching libc is unnecessary: [dependencies.libc] -version = "0.2.39" +version = "0.2" 0.2.39 will work with any patch number below 0.3 - You must include the license files with %license in %files devel: %files devel %license LICENSE-APACHE LICENSE-MIT - You should include CHANGELOG.md in %doc %doc CHANGELOG.md README.md -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901097] Review Request: rust-wat - Rust parser for the WebAssembly Text format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901097 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Bump to 1.0.33 - Please ask upstream to include a license file in the crate - License ok - Latest version packaged - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors - Conforms to Packaging Guidelines Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901090] Review Request: rust-wast - Rust parsers for the WebAssembly Text formats WAT and WAST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901090 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Bump to 32.0.0 - Install the license files with %license in %files devel. - The license files contradict the stated license in the cargo.toml. I have filed a bug with upstream to clarify the situation. https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-tools/issues/206 - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901090] Review Request: rust-wast - Rust parsers for the WebAssembly Text formats WAT and WAST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901090 Bug 1901090 depends on bug 1900274, which changed state. Bug 1900274 Summary: Review Request: rust-leb128 - DWARF's LEB128 encoding library and REPL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900274 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900274] Review Request: rust-leb128 - DWARF's LEB128 encoding library and REPL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900274 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||zebo...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-01-20 19:43:36 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901098] Review Request: rust-wasmparser - Simple event-driven library for parsing WebAssembly binary files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901098 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Bump to 0.73.0 - Please ask upstream to provide a license file in the crate - License ok - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors - Conforms to Packaging Guidelines Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1918394] Review Request: steinberg-petaluma-fonts - Petaluma music font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918394
Jared Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Jared Smith ---
Package is APPROVED. The fedora-review script has a few complaints below, but
I checked them manually and they're false positives.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
= 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]: 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 %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "*No copyright* SIL Open Font License", "Unknown or generated",
"SIL Open Font License 1.1". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /tmp/1918394-steinberg-petaluma-
fonts/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 6 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: 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.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: 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.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be
[Bug 1901092] Review Request: rust-enumset_derive - Internal helper crate for enumset
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901092 --- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Also upstream seems dead, whatever project you need this for probably needs to find a replacement. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1877841] Review Request: python-molecule-podman - Molecule Podman plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877841 chedi toueiti changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1877809] Review Request: python-molecule-docker - molecule Docker plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877809 chedi toueiti changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901092] Review Request: rust-enumset_derive - Internal helper crate for enumset
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901092 --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Also https://github.com/Lymia/enumset/issues/17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901092] Review Request: rust-enumset_derive - Internal helper crate for enumset
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901092 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Please ask upstream to include the license files and readme in the crate - Build fails: Compiling enumset_derive v0.5.0 (/builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0) Running `/usr/bin/rustc --crate-name enumset_derive --edition=2018 src/lib.rs --error-format=json --json=diagnostic-rendered-ansi --crate-type proc-macro --emit=dep-info,link -C prefer-dynamic -C opt-level=3 -C embed-bitcode=no -C metadata=f1d05392172fa523 -C extra-filename=-f1d05392172fa523 --out-dir /builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0/target/release/deps -L dependency=/builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0/target/release/deps --extern darling=/builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0/target/release/deps/libdarling-4853d2ce570ec900.rlib --extern proc_macro2=/builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0/target/release/deps/libproc_macro2-3feabf62339f3e7b.rlib --extern quote=/builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0/target/release/deps/libquote-9b517b766eaaf53c.rlib --extern syn=/builddir/build/BUILD/enumset_derive-0.5.0/target/release/deps/libsyn-538054f1d15a956a.rlib --extern proc_macro -Copt-level=3 -Cdebuginfo=2 -Clink-arg=-Wl,-z,relro,-z,now -Ccodegen-units=1 --cap-lints=warn` error[E0432]: unresolved import `syn::export` --> src/lib.rs:10:10 | 10 | use syn::export::Span; | ^^ could not find `export` in `syn` error: aborting due to previous error For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0432`. error: could not compile `enumset_derive` See https://github.com/dtolnay/syn/issues/956 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901052] Review Request: j4-dmenu-desktop - Generic menu for desktop managers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901052
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Please give your archive a better name:
Source0:
https://github.com/enkore/%{name}/archive/r%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
- Don't gzip the man page yourself, it is handled by rpm:
gzip < %{name}.1 > %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz
- The license file must be installed with %license not %doc:
%files
%license LICENSE
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1895567] Review Request: usd - 3D VFX pipeline interchange file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1895567
--- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
(In reply to Luya Tshimbalanga from comment #3)
> (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #2)
> > - Valid license shorthand is ASL 2.0 without -:
> >
> > License:ASL 2.0
>
> Fixed.
>
> > - Did upstream refuse to version the library?
> Patch sent.
>
> >
> > - Missing arch specific info (isa)
> >
> > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}
> >
>
> Fixed
>
This needs to be in the devel package, not the libs one
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1914634] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-caffeine - Disable the screen saver and auto suspend in gnome shell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914634 Jeremy Newton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-01-20 18:49:32 --- Comment #6 from Jeremy Newton --- Closing as this is built in rawhide. Looks like some rework is needed in rawhide once the gnome 40 migration has finished, which I will try to fix once I get a rawhide VM up and running. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900375] Review Request: rust-more-asserts - Small assertion library for Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900375 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-more-asserts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900513] Review Request: php-laminas-diactoros2 - PSR HTTP Message implementations v2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900513 --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Maybe related to https://github.com/sebastianbergmann/phpunit/issues/4493 in phpunit 9.5.0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900413] Review Request: rust-typetag-impl - Implementation detail of the typetag crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900413 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-typetag-impl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900413] Review Request: rust-typetag-impl - Implementation detail of the typetag crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900413 --- Comment #3 from Olivier Lemasle --- Thank you Robert-André. https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/31802 License & README files asked: https://github.com/dtolnay/typetag/issues/32 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1911296] Review Request: python-enrich - Enrich adds few missing features to the wonderful rich library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1911296 chedi toueiti changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901747] Review Request: python-subprocess-tee - A subprocess.run that works like tee, being able to display output in real time while still capturing it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901747 chedi toueiti changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900375] Review Request: rust-more-asserts - Small assertion library for Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900375 --- Comment #3 from Olivier Lemasle --- Thank you Robert-André. https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/31801 License requested: https://github.com/thomcc/rust-more-asserts/issues/4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1903509] Review Request: python-wled - Python client for WLED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1903509
Fabian Affolter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) |
--- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter ---
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #1)
> Taking this review
>
> Some initial notes:
> - use %py_provides instead of %python_provide if you want to target Fedora
> 32 or below. For F33 or above you don't need this at all:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/
> #_the_py_provides_macro
> - you can use %{py3_dist ...} instead of python3dist(...) -
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/
> #_requires_and_buildrequires_with_standardized_names
> this is optional though
Thanks, for the feedback. Updated
%changelog
* Wed Jan 20 2020 Fabian Affolter - 0.4.4-2
- Update to new macros (#1903509)
Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-wled.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-wled-0.4.4-2.fc33.src.rpm
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449
[Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response
should be blocking this bug.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1619610] mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 Pavel Raiskup changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(praiskup@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #13 from Pavel Raiskup --- Rawhide is fine. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1903509] Review Request: python-wled - Python client for WLED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1903509 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG |--- Keywords||Reopened -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1842662] Review Request: ismrmrd - ISMRM Raw Data Format (ISMRMRD)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842662 Antonio T. sagitter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Blocks||201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Flags|fedora-review? | Last Closed||2021-01-20 17:43:49 --- Comment #8 from Antonio T. sagitter --- Thank you Fabian. I prefer to close this review. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900513] Review Request: php-laminas-diactoros2 - PSR HTTP Message implementations v2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900513 --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- There's no vendor directory but a psr7 and factory directories. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900513] Review Request: php-laminas-diactoros2 - PSR HTTP Message implementations v2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900513
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
The test fails for me:
+ for CMDARG in "php /usr/bin/phpunit9" php73 php74 php80
+ which php /usr/bin/phpunit9
/usr/bin/php
/usr/bin/phpunit9
+ set php /usr/bin/phpunit9
+ php /usr/bin/phpunit9 --bootstrap bootstrap.php --filter
'^((?!(testReasonPhraseDefaultsAgainstIana|testIsNotSeekable|testIsNotWritable|testIsNotReadable|testRewindNotSeekable)).)*$'
--verbose
PHPUnit 9.5.0 by Sebastian Bergmann and contributors.
Test directory
"/builddir/build/BUILD/laminas-diactoros-4ff7400c1c12e404144992ef43c8b733fd9ad516/./vendor/http-interop/http-factory-tests/test"
not found
+ RETURN_CODE=1
+ for CMDARG in "php /usr/bin/phpunit9" php73 php74 php80
+ which php73
which: no php73 in
(/usr/lib64/ccache:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/sbin)
+ for CMDARG in "php /usr/bin/phpunit9" php73 php74 php80
+ which php74
which: no php74 in
(/usr/lib64/ccache:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/sbin)
+ for CMDARG in "php /usr/bin/phpunit9" php73 php74 php80
+ which php80
which: no php80 in
(/usr/lib64/ccache:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/sbin)
+ : check compat autoloader
+ php -r '
require
"/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/php-laminas-diactoros2-2.5.0-1.fc34.x86_64/usr/share/php/Zend/Diactoros2/autoload.php";
exit (class_exists("\\Zend\\Diactoros\\Request") ? 0 : 1);
'
+ exit 1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900413] Review Request: rust-typetag-impl - Implementation detail of the typetag crate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900413 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Please ask upstream to include the license files and readme in their crate - License ok - Latest version packaged - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors - Conforms to Packaging Guidelines Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1900375] Review Request: rust-more-asserts - Small assertion library for Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900375 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - Please ask a license file from upstream - License ok - Latest version packaged - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors - Conforms to Packaging Guidelines Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917998] Review Request: oc-inject - Copy an executable to an OpenShift container and run it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917998 --- Comment #2 from Frank Ch. Eigler --- Generally looks fine & simple. A few nits: - Source: github url should be corrected - Consider noting the oc dependency (origin-clients or perhaps kubernetes-client) - Consider noting the java related soft dependencies - @JAVA_HOME@ needs to be expanded properly within oc-inject, maybe to an os.environ[] expression? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917998] Review Request: oc-inject - Copy an executable to an OpenShift container and run it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917998 Serhei Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917998] Review Request: oc-inject - Copy an executable to an OpenShift container and run it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917998 --- Comment #1 from Serhei Makarov --- Fixed Source0 in the spec file and updated URLs in the comment above. New koji build at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60105083 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 187317] Review Request: mindi - Creation of emergency boot disks/CDs using your kernel, tools and modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=187317
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #49 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- This need to be justified or fixed:
# Avoids to generate debug packages
%global debug_package %{nil}
- Again why the non standard release info:
Release:0.20201118013837.s3776M%{dist}
It should be 1.
- Not used in Fedora
Group:
- Not needed
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(id -u -n)
- Not available for me:
Source:
ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/src/%{srcname}-%{version}.0.20201118013837.tar.gz
- I don't think we support ia64 anymore.
- Please justify this
ExclusiveArch: x86_64 i586 i386 i686 ia64
Why can't it be compiled on other arches?
- Not needed:
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%defattr(-,root,root)
- The license file must be installed with %license in %files:
%license COPYING
- Is there a reason this is not noarchc it seems to be all perl and bash. You
should probably add:
BuildRequires: perl-generators
BuildRequires: perl-interpreter
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917998] Review Request: oc-inject - Copy an executable to an OpenShift container and run it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917998 Serhei Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added Comment|0 |updated --- Comment #0 has been edited --- Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/serhei/oc-inject/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01889778-oc-inject/oc-inject.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/serhei/oc-inject/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01889778-oc-inject/oc-inject-0.7.9-2.fc34.src.rpm Description: Copy an executable to an OpenShift container and run the executable. oc-inject is a prototype tool for last-resort troubleshooting of a running container, when a required debugging tool is not present in the container image. Fedora Account System Username: serhei Note: This is my first package submission for Fedora. I maintain an upstream repo of this project at https://github.com/serhei/oc-inject. Koji scratch build at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=59983051 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917998] Review Request: oc-inject - Copy an executable to an OpenShift container and run it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917998 Frank Ch. Eigler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||f...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|f...@redhat.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 187318] Review Request: mondo - A program which a Linux user can utilize to create a rescue/restore CD/tape
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=187318
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #69 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Use %global not %define
%global srcname mondo
- Group: is not used by Fedora
- Not needed:
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(id -u -n)
- Please justify this, why wouldn't it be available on all Fedora supported
arches:
ExclusiveArch: x86_64 i586 i386 i686 ia64
(also use %{ix86} instead of i586 i386 i686
- make %{?_smp_mflags} → %make_build
- Not needed :
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
- make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install → %make_install
- Not needed it is the default:
%defattr(-,root,root)
- The license file COPYING must be installed with %license not %doc
%license COPYING
- I can't find:
ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/src/mondo-3.3.0.0.20201118013837.tar.gz
I'd rather use http://www.mondorescue.org/ftp/src/
- The release is weird:
Release:0.20201118013837.s3776M%{dist}
It should start at 1 for a release. Why are 20201118013837 and s3776M needed?
Is it extra versioning info?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1898470] [Unretirement] Review Request: nodejs-object-assign - ES6 Object.assign() ponyfill
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898470
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
Package approved
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package does not use a name that already exists.
Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-object-assign
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names
= 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 8 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/nodejs-object-assign/review-nodejs-object-
assign/licensecheck.txt
[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 uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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).
[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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[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
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
[Bug 1914634] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-caffeine - Disable the screen saver and auto suspend in gnome shell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914634 --- Comment #5 from Jeremy Newton --- Thanks for letting me know Clark. I'll take a look in a bit, but it looks like rawhide is a bit "raw" right now :) I'm getting a lot of FTBFS from rawhide, which seems compiler related, so it's a bit hard to work with right now. I was hoping to wait closer to F34 branch (Feb 9th) to start fixing things, but I'll push a build now so I can get some feedback if someone happens to be using rawhide and likes installing gnome extensions. Also, thanks Gwyn! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1914292] Review Request: tkrzw - Fast key-value storage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914292
c...@musicinmybrain.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(ti.eugene@gmail.c
||om)
--- Comment #11 from c...@musicinmybrain.net ---
Almost there! So close! I’m glad you’ve been willing to do the work to get this
package compliant with the Guidelines. It will be a good addition to Fedora.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= Issues =
[!]: The “Requires: pkgconfig” in the -devel subpackage is not needed. The
appropriate dependency to provide %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/ is added
automatically when you install a .pc file there. This fact is not
documented in the Guidelines; I learned it in a review of one of my own
packages.
[!]: According to
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures,
you must place a full description of the i686 build failure above the
ExcludeArch in a comment, with all the detail that you would put in a bug
report. As soon as the package is approved, you must file a bug blocking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F-ExcludeArch-x86, at which
point you can replace this description comment with a comment that simply
links to the bug.
It would be best to file an upstream bug as well, since this issue does
not appear to be Fedora-specific.
[!]: Rpmlint found mixed spaces and tabs in the spec file.
You can convert all tabs to spaces with
“sed -i -r 's/\t//' tkrzw.spec” or, in vim, “:set et” followed by
“:retab”. Or if you prefer all tabs, that is fine too.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0",
"FSF Unlimited License [generated file]", "Apache License 2.0". 15
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/ben/src/fedora/reviews/tkrzw/1914292-tkrzw/re-
review/1914292-tkrzw/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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 uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
Unnecessary Requires on pkgconfig from -devel; this is automatically
added when a .pc file is installed in the usual location.
[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.
[-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
Known ExcludeArch on 32-bit x86. Must follow
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
(except as otherwise noted)
[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).
[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 %license.
[x]: Package requires
[Bug 1897456] Review Request: ghc-OpenGLRaw - A raw binding for the OpenGL graphics system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897456
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
Does not fail with Koji, weird.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
License", "Apache License 2.0". 629 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/ghc-
OpenGLRaw/review-ghc-OpenGLRaw/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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 uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not
[Bug 1918394] Review Request: steinberg-petaluma-fonts - Petaluma music font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918394 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1897456] Review Request: ghc-OpenGLRaw - A raw binding for the OpenGL graphics system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897456 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- I've got a build error: + ./Setup configure --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib64 --docdir=/usr/share/licenses/ghc-OpenGLRaw '--libsubdir=$compiler/$pkgid' '--datasubdir=$pkgid' '--libexecsubdir=$pkgid' --ghc --dynlibdir=/usr/lib64 --global '--ghc-options= -optc-O2 -optc-fexceptions -optc-g -optc-grecord-gcc-switches -optc-pipe -optc-Wall -optc-Werror=format-security -optc-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -optc-Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -optc-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -optc-fstack-protector-strong -optc-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -optc-m64 -optc-mtune=generic -optc-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -optc-fstack-clash-protection -optc-fcf-protection -optl-Wl,-z,relro -optl-Wl,--as-needed' -p --enable-shared --htmldir=/usr/share/doc/ghc/html/libraries/OpenGLRaw-3.3.4.0 --global Configuring OpenGLRaw-3.3.4.0... /tmp/ghc132_0/ghc_1.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/ghc132_0/ghc_1.s:822:0: error: Error: file number less than one | 822 | .file 0 "/builddir/build/BUILD/OpenGLRaw-3.3.4.0" "/tmp/100-0.c" | ^ `gcc' failed in phase `Assembler'. (Exit code: 1) error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.wgcByo (%build) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1918405] New: Review Request: nodejs-tiddlywiki - A non-linear personal web notebook for Node.js and browsers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918405 Bug ID: 1918405 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-tiddlywiki - A non-linear personal web notebook for Node.js and browsers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@flyn.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/nodejs-tiddlywiki.spec SRPM URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/nodejs-tiddlywiki-5.1.23-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: A non-linear personal web notebook for Node.js and browsers. Fedora Account System Username: mike I am new to node.js and node.js packaging. It is difficult for me to see whether I have this right or if node.js is pulling in portions of tiddlywiki at runtime. I did notice that the nodejs-packaging-bundler package is not presently in the Fedora 33 repository (i.e., https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/33/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/n/). I had to build this package myself. Is this expected? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1897441] Review Request: ghc-infer-license - Infer software license from a given license file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897441
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
Package approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated", "[generated file]",
"GNU Affero General Public License, Version 3", "*No copyright* Apache
License 2.0", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "BSD 3-clause "New"
or "Revised" License", "BSD 4-clause "Original" or "Old" License",
"GNU General Public License, Version 2", "GNU Lesser General Public
License, Version 2.1", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 3",
"*No copyright* Mozilla Public License 2.0", "*No copyright* GNU
Affero General Public License, Version 3", "BSD 3-clause "New" or
"Revised" License BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License [generated file]",
"ISC License". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/ghc-infer-license/review-
ghc-infer-license/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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 uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
[Bug 1666545] Review Request: python-qdarkstyle - A dark stylesheet for Qt applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1666545 --- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin --- (In reply to Jonny Heggheim from comment #5) > Sorry, this package was forgotten since it was optional by Electrum and > Electron Cash. Would like to include it. Could you repost a SPEC with Hirotaka Wakabayashi's comment adressed? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1918394] New: Review Request: steinberg-petaluma-fonts - Petaluma music font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918394 Bug ID: 1918394 Summary: Review Request: steinberg-petaluma-fonts - Petaluma music font Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/steinberg-petaluma-fonts/steinberg-petaluma-fonts.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/steinberg-petaluma-fonts/steinberg-petaluma-fonts-1.055-1.20190129gitc7a3e8e.fc34.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: Petaluma is a Unicode typeface designed by Steinberg for its Dorico music notation and scoring application. It is compliant with version 1.3 of the Standard Music Font Layout (SMuFL), a community-driven standard for how music symbols should be laid out in the Unicode Private Use Area (PUA) in the Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) for compatibility between different scoring applications. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1619610] mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 Jan Horak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Flags||needinfo?(praiskup@redhat.c ||om) Last Closed|2020-11-24 19:34:48 |2021-01-20 15:58:13 --- Comment #12 from Jan Horak --- Already merged by Martin. Do you need to release the update for the F32+ or is the rawhide sufficient? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1894726] Review Request: gr-iio - GNU Radio interface for IIO
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1894726 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1894726] Review Request: gr-iio - GNU Radio interface for IIO
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1894726 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1914292] Review Request: tkrzw - Fast key-value storage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914292 --- Comment #10 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- I’m hoping to examine your latest version sometime today (New York timezone). Thanks for working through all of these details. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731
--- Comment #47 from Simone Caronni ---
(In reply to Oleg Girko from comment #45)
> - Update to 0.21.0.
For the 0.21 release something has changed in the boost code, so Boost as
provided by the base distribution in CentOS/RHEL 7 is no longer enough.
I'm struggling on how to make the build system consider
-I%{_includedir}/boost169 both at %configure time and at make time.
If I add the BOOST_CPPFLAGS I can pass configure but not the build, if I add it
to CXXFLAGS or CPPFLAGS it breaks the configure detection (with or without
BOOST_CPPFLAGS declared).
Any hint? Everything is in the SPEC file above.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1834731] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer to Peer Cryptographic Currency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834731 --- Comment #46 from Simone Caronni --- Spec URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/bitcoin.spec SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/bitcoin-0.21.0-2.fc32.src.rpm * Wed Jan 20 2021 Simone Caronni - 0.21.0-2 - Update to 0.21.0. - Remove java build requirement. - Use local folder for test output. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1918111] Review Request: bitwarden-cli - Bitwarden vault CLI tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918111 Stephen Gallagher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sgall...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sgall...@redhat.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||needinfo?(michel@michel-slm ||.name) --- Comment #1 from Stephen Gallagher --- warning: Explicit %attr() mode not applicable to symlink: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/bitwarden-cli-1.13.3-1.fc34.x86_64/usr/bin/bw I think you can just drop that, since you set the permissions of the linked file in the %install section. Also please include a comment explaining how you generated the bundled dependencies and licenses. Other than that, it looks good to me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1908909] Review Request: keyring-ima-signer - An IMA file signing tool using the kernel keyring
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908909 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/keyring-ima-signer -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1914740] Review Request: rteval-loads - Provide source for system loads for rteval
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914740 Jiri Kastner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cz172...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(jka...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #2 from Jiri Kastner --- i didn't liked this concept years ago, nothing changed :) as it is publicly available tarball signed with checksums also publicly available, i suggest instead create helper which will download file from cdn.kernel.org, verify it and creates rpm if needed for offline sites. would be that problem? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917625] Review Request: volk - The Vector Optimized Library of Kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917625 --- Comment #5 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #4) > Thanks Jan. > > It seems some tests are failing on s390x and ppc64le, I will address it > upstream before pushing it into fedora: > > 92 - qa_volk_32fc_s32fc_multiply_32fc (Failed) > 93 - qa_volk_32fc_s32fc_rotatorpuppet_32fc (Failed) > 102 - qa_volk_32fc_x2_s32fc_multiply_conjugate_add_32fc (Failed) Upsstream ticket: https://github.com/gnuradio/volk/issues/442 Maybe I will temporally bypass the tests in order to finish the gnuradio rebase and then handle this problem in the rawhide. IMHO not much people use gnuradio at s390x and ppc64le so it shouldn't cause much harm. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917625] Review Request: volk - The Vector Optimized Library of Kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917625 --- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Škarvada --- Thanks Jan. It seems some tests are failing on s390x and ppc64le, I will address it upstream before pushing it into fedora: 92 - qa_volk_32fc_s32fc_multiply_32fc (Failed) 93 - qa_volk_32fc_s32fc_rotatorpuppet_32fc (Failed) 102 - qa_volk_32fc_x2_s32fc_multiply_conjugate_add_32fc (Failed) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917625] Review Request: volk - The Vector Optimized Library of Kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917625 Jan Žerdík changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917373] Review Request: qt6-qt3d - Qt6 - Qt3D QML bindings and C++ APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917373 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qt3d/qt6-qt3d.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qt3d/qt6-qt3d-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt 3D provides functionality for near-realtime simulation systems with support for 2D and 3D rendering in both Qt C++ and Qt Quick applications). Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917329] Review Request: qt6-qtimageformats - Qt6 - QtImageFormats component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917329 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtimageformats/qt6-qtimageformats.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtimageformats/qt6-qtimageformats-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: The core Qt Gui library by default supports reading and writing image files of the most common file formats: PNG, JPEG, BMP, GIF and a few more, ref. Reading and Writing Image Files. The Qt Image Formats add-on module provides optional support for other image file formats, including: MNG, TGA, TIFF, WBMP. Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917323] Review Request: qt6-qtnetworkauth - Qt6 - NetworkAuth component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917323 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtnetworkauth/qt6-qtnetworkauth.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtnetworkauth/qt6-qtnetworkauth-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - NetworkAuth component Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917300] Review Request: qt6-qtwayland - Qt6 - Wayland platform support and QtCompositor module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917300 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtwayland/qt6-qtwayland.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtwayland/qt6-qtwayland-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - Wayland platform support and QtCompositor module Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917296] Review Request: qt6-qttranslations - Qt6 - QtTranslations module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917296 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Update package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qttranslations/qt6-qttranslations.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qttranslations/qt6-qttranslations-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - QtTranslations module Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917295] Review Request: qt6-qtshadertools - Qt6 - Qt Shader Tools module builds on the SPIR-V Open Source Ecosystem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917295 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtshadertools/qt6-qtshadertools.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtshadertools/qt6-qtshadertools-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - Qt Shader Tools module builds on the SPIR-V Open Source Ecosystem Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917293] Review Request: qt6-qtquicktimeline - Qt6 - QuickTimeline plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917293 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtquicktimeline/qt6-qtquicktimeline.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtquicktimeline/qt6-qtquicktimeline-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: The Qt Quick Timeline plugin provides QML types to use timelines and keyframes to animate Qt Quick user interfaces. Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917289] Review Request: qt6-qtquickcontrols2 - Qt6 - module with set of QtQuick controls for embedded
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917289 --- Comment #1 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtquickcontrols2/qt6-qtquickcontrols2.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtquickcontrols2/qt6-qtquickcontrols2-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: The Qt Labs Controls module provides a set of controls that can be used to build complete interfaces in Qt Quick. Unlike Qt Quick Controls, these controls are optimized for embedded systems and so are preferred for hardware with limited resources. Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917288] Review Request: qt6-qtquick3d - Qt6 - Quick3D Libraries and utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917288 --- Comment #2 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtquick3d/qt6-qtquick3d.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtquick3d/qt6-qtquick3d-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt 3D provides functionality for near-realtime simulation systems with support for 2D and 3D rendering in both Qt C++ and Qt Quick applications). Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917281] Review Request: qt6-qtsvg - Qt6 - Support for rendering and displaying SVG
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917281 --- Comment #2 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtsvg/qt6-qtsvg.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtsvg/qt6-qtsvg-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) is an XML-based language for describing two-dimensional vector graphics. Qt provides classes for rendering and displaying SVG drawings in widgets and on other paint devices. Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917283] Review Request: qt6-qt5compat - Qt6 - Qt 5 Compatibility Libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917283 --- Comment #2 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qt5compat/qt6-qt5compat.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qt5compat/qt6-qt5compat-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - Qt 5 Compatibility Libraries Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917276] Review Request: qt6-qtdeclarative - Qt6 - QtDeclarative component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917276 --- Comment #2 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtdeclarative/qt6-qtdeclarative.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qtdeclarative/qt6-qtdeclarative-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - QtDeclarative component Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1917275] Review Request: qt6-qttools - Qt6 - QtTool components
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917275 --- Comment #2 from Jan Grulich --- Updated package: Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qttools/qt6-qttools.spec SRPM URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/qt6/qt6-qttools/qt6-qttools-6.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Qt6 - QtTool components Fedora Account System Username: jgrulich -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
