[Bug 184530] Review Request: perl-RPM2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 02:58 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) Didn't the author formerly work for RedHat, and write this while he worked there? Wouldn't RedHat have a record of this license? Or, in a similar vein, is the copyright of works produced by employees whilst working for Red Hat assigned to Red Hat? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191782] Review Request: rafkill - Top-down shooter with powerups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rafkill - Top-down shooter with powerups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191782 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 03:12 EST --- Thanks for the review! Imported and build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191594] Review Request: gtkglextmm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtkglextmm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191594 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 03:21 EST --- Package looks fine, except one issue remaining: You are shipping libtool archives (*.la). The PackageGuideLines Gods want you to remove them. I for one consider this part of the package guidelines as in error, and therefore will not force anybody to remove *.la, but will leave such a decision to the packager. I.e. decide on yourself if you want to ship them or not. APPROVED. To get sponsored, please proceed with Get a Fedora Account on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 185951] Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185951 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 04:31 EST --- I updated the spec and srpm to a new upstream version. I also removed some tcl packages that were shipped with amsn that i now Require: amsn 0.96 is going to be released soon so I hope someone will sponsor me so I can release the rpm at the same time. http://amsn.hoentjen.eu/download/amsn.spec http://amsn.hoentjen.eu/download/amsn-0.96-0.5.20060517svn.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190027] Review Request: hexter-dssi - DSSI software synthesizer plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hexter-dssi - DSSI software synthesizer plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190027 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 04:37 EST --- You're missing a buildreq on liblo-devel. And hexter can build against gtk2, changing the buildreq to gtk2-devel is probably preferable. rpmlint comes up clean. All those Requires: can be nuked, rely on auto deps. However: $ rpm -qf /usr/lib/dssi/ file /usr/lib/dssi is not owned by any package dssi seems to be implemented as only a header file. No library. So there's no library dep to pick up on. All dssi plugins are probably going to have to have Requires: dssi. You might want to symlink /usr/bin/hexter to /usr/bin/jack-dssi-host. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 185951] Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185951 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 04:56 EST --- BTW, I don't think soon is enough. You should provide a package to the current version too, getting into Extras first, then updating it as the next release comes. I say this because leaving the release for later isn't good. I think the most important thing is to bring this good app to Extras right now, with the current stable version, and then updating it when a new version is release (we all don't know when this will occur, and looking at amsn's history, I think we got to wait ;-) So the summary is: please make a package for version 0.95 :) I would be glad to follow your steps and help on what I can. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 185423] Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185423 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 07:21 EST --- New version of PEAR_Command_Packaging has been released All these things should fixed in a new version: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging.spec http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging-0.1.1-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 07:34 EST --- The issue with the udev file is still there - --- zaptel.rules2006-05-18 11:28:15.0 +0100 +++ zaptel.rules.clean 2006-05-18 11:28:42.0 +0100 @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ -KERNEL==zapctl, NAME=zap/ctl, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 -KERNEL==zaptimer, NAME=zap/timer, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 -KERNEL==zapchannel, NAME=zap/channel, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 -KERNEL==zappseudo, NAME=zap/pseudo, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 -KERNEL==zap[0-9]*, NAME=zap/%n, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 +KERNEL=zapctl, NAME=zap/ctl, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 +KERNEL=zaptimer, NAME=zap/timer, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 +KERNEL=zapchannel, NAME=zap/channel, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 +KERNEL=zappseudo, NAME=zap/pseudo, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 +KERNEL=zap[0-9]*, NAME=zap/%n, OWNER=root, GROUP=root, MODE=0660 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192049] Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnash - GNU Flash player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192049 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 08:57 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) (In reply to comment #4) There is a bug in doc/C/Makefile.am regarding info files installation during staged install. I'll attach patches. Oh, I didn't notice any error. That's strange. Do you have /sbin in your path or are you building as root? Not a big deal, it is upstream now. Well the libs are required by each of the other subpackages so I thought it makes sense to separate them out: assuming many people would only want one of the plugins. Indeed, but having the standalone player together with the plugin doesn't hurt and may even help, as sometimes the plugin fails but the standalone player work and the .swf is always downloaded. Once the plugins stream the flash maybe it could be reconsidered. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189268] Review Request: xscreensaver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xscreensaver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189268 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 09:22 EST --- Okay, for pre 5.00 version, I updated to 4.99.2.5-0.1. Jamie, I will send another e-mail later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 09:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) The issue with the udev file is still there - The extra equals sign is a udev-version specific thing. I believe it was in udev version 054 where the change was made. The next version of zaptel (due RSN) will conditially generate a udev rules file appropriate for the installed version of udev. As far as the ownership of the device files goes, it makes a lot of sense to run asterisk as a non-root user. How best to accomplish that in RPM packages is something I'll have to look into. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192119] Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tuxkart - Kids 3D go-kart racing game featuring Tux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192119 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 11:00 EST --- Unfortunately tuxkart includes images that (in some cases might, in others clearly) violate trademarks and/or copyright: images/adverts.rgb: SuSE, Slashdot, Philips, TuxRacer, SourceForge, VA Linux logos, I guess plib could be considered safe ;-) images/egypt.rgb: looks like scanned Egyptian drawings images/geeko_icon.rgb, images/players.rgb: resembles SUSE's geeko mascot, don't know whether this is trademarked images/lunchbox.rgb: something that looks like a Barbie doll; images/lunchbox2.rgb: a Pokemon screenshot(?!) images/mnm.rgb: a scanned MM wrap this issue should be resolved IMO for instance by replacing the images (preferrably upstream). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 11:13 EST --- (In reply to comment #14) (In reply to comment #13) I've got a heavily updated version here: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/mpich2-1.0.3-1.fc5.src.rpm I can't each the above file Whoops, fixed. Actually, i have another heavily updated version somewhere too. But it can't go in until openmpi/lam gets re-worked a bit (to allow for their co-existence). Hopefully i submit patches for openmpi and lam by weekend and try to get this moving forward. ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/mpich2/mpich2-1.0.3-3.src.rpm I'll take a look. What do you think needs changing in lam and openmpi? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 11:25 EST --- If you generate different udev files dynamically based on the udev version, then you should probably also include a versioned Requires on udev. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 12:23 EST --- rsync and openssh-clients need to be BuildRequires too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 12:41 EST --- Re: comment 91 What about just putting the doc/html area in doc, and both demos and examples back in devel. That would move off a large amount of docs and would get rid of all these wacky requirements. The doc subpackage would just have html stuff in it. assistant and qtdemo could move back to devel. I guess you missed the part about assistant auto-loading docs on startup (comment #57), so assitant and doc/html are tied together. qtdemo I don't see as something strictly needed in a development environment, so, IMO should stay in -doc, but I don't feel strongly about that. I don't see you using -headerdir, -datadir, and -sysconfdir Not yet, though we're using -libdir (though trivially, for a different reason) On the desktop-install, shouldn't the vendor be: 'fedora'? That's not a hard/fast rule. It's more important, long-term, that .desktop files reflect upstream and *never* be renamed, so, I chose qt4 instead. 2. It still doesn't build for me even with the patch from comment #90. Yeah, turns out you can't mix hard-coding the docdir path *and* use %doc pointing to the same place (because using %doc rm -rf everything there first). Fix: set qt_docdir to something else, like back to %%_docdir/%%name-doc-%%version -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 13:04 EST ---
(In reply to comment #93)
So, without the -headerdir/-datadir/-sysconfdir is the package currently
still parallel installable (x86/x86_64)?
I'll try to double-compile the package, to check. I'll wait until the spec
file is stabilized. Because it takes one hour to compile, on my computer (and
also 1GB).
In qt4-4.1.2-19.spec, the %{qtdir}/lib symlink is missing (if %{_lib}!=lib),
and a lot of lines of %install fail because of that.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192124] Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192124 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 13:09 EST --- In reply to comment #2: Looks good. You might ping upstream with the deps patch and ask them to add a '--disable-rpath' down the road. In reply to comment #3: ok, not a blocker. rpmlint now shows clean and I don't see any further blockers here... so this package is APPROVED. Rememeber to close this review NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189886] Review Request: FluidSynth - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: FluidSynth - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189886 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||189884 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||189884 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 185951] Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185951 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 15:09 EST --- It also includes a copy of the BWidget tcl package, which I've already packaged for FE. Just add Requires: bwidget and don't include the local copy. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 185951] Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185951 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 15:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) amsn builds against local copies of libpng, libjpeg, and zlib, which is a no-no for Fedora Extras. This must be changed to build against the system copies. You don't have to remove them from the sources, just make sure it links against the existing libpng/libjpeg/zlib, and add BuildRequires: libpng-devel libjpeg-devel zlib-devel I had a similar issue to this with gtkwave, which bundles zlib and bzip2. I made absolutely sure that the system libraries were used by not only patching the Makefiles but deleting the bundled libraries from the unpacked sources in %prep so that there was no possibility of building and linking against them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192124] Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: exiv2: Exif and Iptc metadata manipulation library and tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192124 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 15:39 EST --- imported, build completed for fc6/devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 15:52 EST --- Thanks for the review Orion. I've added the BRs and re-word the changelogs. The package is now properly put up for (more) review here; ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/mpich2/mpich2-1.0.3-3.src.rpm ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/mpich2/mpich2.spec. However it can really pass Extras' review now until some changes are made to the alternatives configuration in both openmpi and lam, to avoid conflicts. I hope to soon submit a patch to openmpi to effect such change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192285] Review Request: isic -- IP Stack Integrity Checker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: isic -- IP Stack Integrity Checker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192285 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192285] Review Request: isic -- IP Stack Integrity Checker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: isic -- IP Stack Integrity Checker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192285 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 16:29 EST --- Per discussion w/warren on irc, I'll just chmod 644 wrapper.sh. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192257] Review Request: OpenHPI-2.4.1
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: OpenHPI-2.4.1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192257 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Component|Package Review |openhpi AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 16:31 EST --- This doesn't go through the review process as such. Bouncing to maintainer. Not sure why a major version update is needed for FC5, though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191671] Review Request: serpentine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: serpentine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191671 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 16:57 EST --- I'm jumping in for a formal review. Stay tuned. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192313] New: Review Request: koan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192313 Summary: Review Request: koan Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://michaeldehaan.net/software/RPMS/koan.spec SRPM URL: http://michaeldehaan.net/software/RPMS/koan-0.1.0-1.src.rpm Description: Cobbler is a command line tool for simplified configuration of a provisioning server. It supports provisioning via PXE, Xen, and re-provisioning an existing Linux system via a method called auto-kickstarting, made popular by Red Hat Network. The last two modes require usage of a program called koan on the remote system. Koan stands for kickstart-over-a-network and allows for both network provisioning of new Xen guests and auto-kickstarting. It interacts with a centralized boot server that has been configured with cobbler. Documentation for each is contained in the manpages for the respective programs (for now). Both applications are written in Python and are released under the GPL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192311] Review Request: cobbler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cobbler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192311 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 17:14 EST --- This is associated with a program submitted here, but for just using PXE, the koan program is not required. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192313 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191624] Review Request: perl-Test-Expect - Automated driving and testing of terminal-based programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Expect - Automated driving and testing of terminal-based programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191624 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 17:51 EST --- Thanks for the review. Imported and built for FC-5 and devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191628] Review Request: perl-Net-SNMP - Object oriented interface to SNMP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-SNMP - Object oriented interface to SNMP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191628 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 17:53 EST --- Thanks for the review. Imported and built for FC-4, FC-5, and devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 17:59 EST --- Mike, perl-Net-SNMP has been built for FC-4, FC-5, and devel. The devel RPMs have already been pushed into the mirrors. The FC-4 and FC-5 will take a little a bit longer (next push). jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191239] Review Request: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 17:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) NEEDSWORK: Source: seems to need to be http://dl.sf.net/sourceforge/qjackctl/[...] otherwise I get a 404 as is. Fixed. The Requires: jack-audio-connection-kit = 0.80.0 is unnecessary as no such old version is going to be in Extras. Fixed (comment: Extras does not live in a vaccum, the requires line would have addressed Planet CCRMA users that have old versions and migrate to the extras package - I know, very unlikely, but if experience is any guide if it can happen it will). The generic INSTALL instructions should not be packaged. The desktop file should be included as Source:, not embedded in the spec, as shown in the Desktop Files section of the packaging guidelines. Fixed. Spec URL: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/extras/qjackctl.spec SRPM URL: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/extras/qjackctl-0.2.20-4.0.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection
Kit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 19:29 EST ---
Really my beef here is with inconsistency. You *are* already specifying the
include dir in the devel package as simply %{_includedir}/jack, I would prefer
if you specified the lib dir in the main package the same way. And putting
trailing slashes on the directories is nicer for Q/A, otherwise you can't really
tell for sure from the SPEC alone that its supposed to be a directory.
But I think we're mostly just nitpicking at this point. :)
Everything else looks good to me. Someone please approve/sponsor, many things
depend on jack...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 168719] Review Request: gdal
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gdal https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168719 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 19:59 EST --- if anyone is interested i got a patch around that makes dynamically building vs hdf4 possible. just lemme know. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184000] Review Request: emacs-vm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-vm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 21:27 EST --- If you could update the package to reflect the new 'emacs-common-$name' I can see about doing a review. (removing FE-NEEDSPONSOR as you are now sponsored). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189892] Review Request: dssi - Disposable Soft Synth Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dssi - Disposable Soft Synth Interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 22:14 EST --- Thanks. Updated bits here Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/dssi.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/dssi-0.9.1-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189889] Review Request: vkeybd - Virtual MIDI Keyboard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: vkeybd - Virtual MIDI Keyboard https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189889 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 22:42 EST --- Added nando's vkeybd icon. Minor cleanups. Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/vkeybd.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/vkeybd-0.1.17-4.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190997] Review Request: linux-wlan-ng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-wlan-ng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190997 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 23:30 EST --- Where does one get the current kmodtool? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192363] Review Request: GTS - Gnu Triangulated Surface Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GTS - Gnu Triangulated Surface Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192363 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-18 23:42 EST --- I've been packaging gts for many years, so ... NEEDSWORK: - Shipping static libs Add --disable-static to %configure - Bogus Provides: gts-devel at the beginning of the spec. - Some of the binaries' names are too general and likely to conflict with other packages: /usr/bin/delaunay /usr/bin/happrox /usr/bin/transform I propose to rename them into gtsname - Mispackaged file: /usr/share/gts/gts.m4 This file is an autoconf support macro and belongs into /usr/share/aclocal - The html docs contained in gts-*.rpm are devel docs. They should be packaged into the gts-devel-*.rpm. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191549] Review Request: hping3 - TCP/IP stack auditing and much more
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hping3 - TCP/IP stack auditing and much more https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191549 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-19 00:20 EST --- Fixed in: Spec URL: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/hping3/hping3.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/hping3/hping3-0.0.20051105-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 179040] Review Request: socat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: socat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179040 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-19 00:23 EST --- upstream will add configure.in/ac in his next release. I am still investigating why mock builds fail, but my FC4 x86_64 builds fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 191603] Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191603 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-19 00:57 EST --- I honestly don't know about the version thing. The script originally came from upstream, was modified by Dag and then by myself to be a little clener. My guess is that there was the old format (aka unknown), and then the 1.2 format. If it's a serious concern, I can verify with the current project maintainer -- just let me know. I personally haven't seen anything other than 1.2, which has been around for a long time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190997] Review Request: linux-wlan-ng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-wlan-ng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190997 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-19 01:33 EST --- devel branch of thinkpad-kmod or lirc-kmod in CVS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
