[Bug 188974] Review Request: libGLw
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: libGLw https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188974 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 02:44 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Some quick comments after looking at the spec: * It would be better to have your real name on the bug report. Not a big deal, it is in the spec anyway. Irrelevant. * the Buildroot is no the right one http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-f196e7b2477c2f5dd97ef64e8eacddfb517f1aa1 It'd be nice if emacs et al defaulted to the official BuildRoot tag. * no need to conditionalize openmotif support, it should always be true in fedora extras There's no need to conditionalize the support for many of the things which Fedora Core and Fedora Extras packages already conditionalize. Conditionalizing features is itself a feature, which can be useful to rebuilders, and for a variety of other reasons. This is not a flaw in the package, and is IMHO orthagonal to inclusion of the package into Extras. * the non free file shouldn't be distributed. I generally completely agree with that. In this case the file is not open-source, but it both unused, and is legally redistributable, so it is not a problem legally or practically for it to be in the package, however it would be nice if upstream removed it in the future. There's no real-world gain of removing it IMHO, and it has the cost of having to re-do that every time there is a new upstream release of Mesa which contains it. Also, our tarballs no longer match upstream's then, so can't be verified by MD5sum or whatever. what I do in such cases is provide with a script in SourceXX that unpack the upstream tarball, remove the offending files and repack, such that a reviewer can easily reproduce what you did in the SOURCES directory. An example where I do that is grads (with the script grads-remove-files and the list of files grads-removed-files-list) although you could do more simply since you only have one file to remove. Sounds reasonable for files which are not legally redistributable, such as mp3 decoder software, and other things which are legally encumbered. In the case of this file, it is redistributable as-is, and is unused, so moot. (In reply to comment #2) Another remark, maybe BuildRequires: mesa-libGL-devel should be BuildRequires: libGL-devel but I haven't really investigated if there is a need for the mesa implementation or not. Yup, BuildRequires: libGL-devel should be used by anything needing libGL, unless a specific implementation of OpenGL is required. (In reply to comment #3) 2 more comments: * You should add to %docs Mesa-6.5/src/glw/README as it contains the licence. Sounds reasonable. * I am not convinced that it is right to make a source package out of a whole package by taking only bits of what is in the tarball while the remaining is in another source package. May be worth asking on the extras list. Couldn't the upstream project be convinced to split the tarball? Adam more or less _is_ the upstream person who is splitting the tarball essentially.(In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #1) * the non free file shouldn't be distributed. what I do in such cases is provide with a script in SourceXX that unpack the upstream tarball, remove the offending files and repack, such that a reviewer can easily reproduce what you did in the SOURCES directory. An example where I do that is grads (with the script grads-remove-files and the list of files grads-removed-files-list) although you could do more simply since you only have one file to remove. That feels like such overkill. I'll give it a shot though. Definite overkill, with no real-world gain, and no real-world risk of not doing it. * I am not convinced that it is right to make a source package out of a whole package by taking only bits of what is in the tarball while the remaining is in another source package. May be worth asking on the extras list. Couldn't the upstream project be convinced to split the tarball? No, they can't. This battle has been fought and lost before. We already slice up the default build of Mesa, since we don't use its libglut for being non-free. Wrong. Brian Paul split Mesa's GLUT library out into MesaGLUT in the 6.4 release. Fedora doesn't remove the files, we just don't ship the MesaGLUT tarball. The Mesa source just seems to have some leftover glut related files still stuck in it. No idea if they're just files that were missed, or if they're needed for anything, but we don't ship them in the binary packages, so it doesn't much matter. Other changes applied, along with some fixed %package statements to make the binary rpm not be named libGLw-libGLw-*. New versions uploaded to the same URLs as before.
[Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop
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: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 03:10 EST --- I built and installed -12 on my rawhide x86_64 box. After creating a symlink /usr/lib/monodevelop - ../lib64/monodevelop to get the wrapper script to run, I get a backtrace dialogue listing missing addins it can't find (Monodevelop.SourceEditor.addin, CSharpBinding.addin, ...). Ignoring that and continuing startup finally it throws an exception: System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. --- System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at 0x0 unknown method at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.MonoCMethod:InternalInvoke (object,object[]) at System.Reflection.MonoCMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x0] --- End of inner exception stack trace --- at System.Reflection.MonoCMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x0] at System.Reflection.MonoCMethod.Invoke (BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x0] at System.Reflection.ConstructorInfo.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters) [0x0] at System.Activator.CreateInstance (System.Type type, Boolean nonPublic) [0x0] at System.Activator.CreateInstance (System.Type type) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Core.AddIns.AddIn.CreateObject (System.String className) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Ide.Codons.PadCodon.CreatePad () [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Ide.Codons.PadCodon.BuildItem (System.Object owner, System.Collections.ArrayList subItems, MonoDevelop.Core.AddIns.ConditionCollection conditions) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Core.AddIns.DefaultAddInTreeNode.BuildChildItems (System.Object caller) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Core.AddIns.AddInService.GetTreeItems (System.String path, System.Type itemType) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Ide.Gui.DefaultWorkbench.InitializeLayout (IWorkbenchLayout workbenchLayout) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Ide.Gui.Workbench.Initialize (IProgressMonitor monitor) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Ide.Gui.IdeApp.Initialize (IProgressMonitor monitor) [0x0] at MonoDevelop.Ide.Gui.IdeStartup.Run (System.String[] args) [0x0] -- 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 184331] Review Request: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system
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: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184331 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 03:38 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) (In reply to comment #8) - I folded the devel package into the main package since there's not much sense in having the split (since otherwise the main package would have to Require it). Very bad move. Please revert this change and split into *-devel and *non-devel, again. If the main package would have to require it, it sounds like the files in the devel package (at least some of them) aren't really devel files. What was in the devel package that's needed by the main package? Is there anything that was in the devel package that's *not* needed by the main package? -- 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 188974] Review Request: libGLw
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: libGLw https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188974 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 04:09 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) (In reply to comment #1) * It would be better to have your real name on the bug report. Not a big deal, it is in the spec anyway. Irrelevant. It is important to be able to identify the people behind fedora extras contributors. * no need to conditionalize openmotif support, it should always be true in fedora extras There's no need to conditionalize the support for many of the things which Fedora Core and Fedora Extras packages already conditionalize. Conditionalizing features is itself a feature, which can be useful to rebuilders, and for a variety of other reasons. This is not a flaw in the package, and is IMHO orthagonal to inclusion of the package into Extras. Not orthogonal, such conditionnal should be avoided unless they correspond with real needs. It's not a must or blocker, but simpler is better. For example if it is an old leftover that is not usefull anymore, it is usefull to point it out, if such comments are not done during the review they'll be never done. * the non free file shouldn't be distributed. I generally completely agree with that. In this case the file is not open-source, but it both unused, and is legally redistributable, From the comment in the spec file I wrongly assumed that the file was not redistributable. It is much better to distribute and remove it as it is done in the spec in that case. (I didn't had a look at the file). Sounds reasonable for files which are not legally redistributable, such as mp3 decoder software, and other things which are legally encumbered. In the case of this file, it is redistributable as-is, and is unused, so moot. Agreed. Adam more or less _is_ the upstream person who is splitting the tarball essentially.(In reply to comment #4) I don't understand. I went to the mesa home site and indeed the tarball is not split in Mesa and libGLw? Definite overkill, with no real-world gain, and no real-world risk of not doing it. Indeed, my comment was wrong. Maybe the comment in the spec file should be changed to # WARNING: The following files are copyright Mark J. Kilgard under the GLUT # license and are not free software (but redistributable), so we remove them. More importantly here I think, is which upstream do you think is more likely to fix bugs in libGLw and/or respond to developer inquiries and bug reports, etc? I would wager the Mesa project would be much more responsive than would SGI, and definitely Mesa project is more likely to provide bugfixed tarballs in an open-project style manner. Indeed, but not a tarball for libGLw, a tarball for Mesa, so it's dubious to use the same source, Mesa-*.tar.bz2 for 2 distinct srpms. It is not explicitly forbidden but I consider it bad practice. Maybe another reviewer could accept that practice, or as I said above we could also ask on the fedora-extras-list for advice. -- 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 196434] Review Request: ren
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: ren https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196434 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 04:15 EST --- I am sorry, but as this is my first approved package, I am not sure about the next step... Does your approval mean that I am 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 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 04:18 EST --- OK, updated ntop. Dropped the effort to make it work with Glib2, this should fix what Ralf was seeing. Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/ntop.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/ntop-3.2-6.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 196434] Review Request: ren
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: ren https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196434 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 04:19 EST --- Nope.. someone needs to sponsor you. You needed to have FE-NEEDSPONSOR blocking your review request. I can't sponsor anyone just yet. -- 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 196434] Review Request: ren
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: ren https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196434 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 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 200374] New: Review Request: qstat - Real-time Game Server Status for Quake servers
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=200374 Summary: Review Request: qstat - Real-time Game Server Status for Quake servers 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: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/qstat.spec SRPM URL: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/qstat-2.10-2.src.rpm Description: QStat is a command-line program that gathers real-time statistics from Internet game servers. Most supported games are of the first person shooter variety (Quake, Half-Life, etc) -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 196177] Review Request: kdmtheme - Theme Manager for KDM
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: kdmtheme - Theme Manager for KDM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196177 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client
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: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 07:19 EST --- Waiting to see a final update (per comment #32 and comment #33), then we can probably approve this. -- 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 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client
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: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||net) -- 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 196177] Review Request: kdmtheme - Theme Manager for KDM
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: kdmtheme - Theme Manager for KDM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196177 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||au) -- 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 200348] Review Request: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support 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: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200348 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 07:21 EST --- Hi :) Thanks for packaging it, I wanted to do it, too :) I'm not a sponsor, but I can give you some advices: * as far as I know, license of libgadu is only LGPL * you should include COPYING file to %%doc, and also, include more docs in the main package, not in -devel * I don't think using of libgadu-current.tar.gz is good. This file changes every day and md5sum of upstream source won't match md5 of source included in SRPM * you should change doc files charset to utf8 (by iconv) * change version in changelog entry. According to changelog inital release is 20060717-1, but in fact it is 20060726-1 -- 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 196262] Review Request: katapult: Faster access to applications, bookmarks, and other items
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: katapult: Faster access to applications, bookmarks, and other items https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196262 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 07:22 EST --- Don't forget to close this once the package has been imported into Extras' 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
[Bug 199968] Review Request: xdg-utils - Basic desktop integration functions
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: xdg-utils - Basic desktop integration functions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199968 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 07:32 EST --- Thanks, importing... -- 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 199573] Review Request: BackupPC - high-performance backup system
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: BackupPC - high-performance backup system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199573 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 07:38 EST --- looks good now APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE
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: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 07:41 EST --- I'm not sure about this; does PYTHONOPTIMIZE do the opposite of what I think it does? I'm not so sure anymore, and I never intended to leave that line active (uncommented). I *think* eric doesn't actually use it one way or the other. -- 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 199919] Review Request: Asuka
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: Asuka https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199919 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|[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 193240] Review Request: XaraLX - Vector/general purpose graphics utility
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: XaraLX - Vector/general purpose graphics utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193240 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 08:56 EST --- Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/XaraLX.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/XaraLX-0.7-1.r1564.src.rpm - bump to new version - includes 64 bit fixes - Additional docs - fixed EOL for xaralx.htm - fixed multiple mode errors for header and source files - removed mixed use of spaces and tabs The package builds cleanly on x86_64 with rpmlint not giving a single complaint! I've not built it in mock yet (my testrig is not working happily today from a remote login). -- 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 198586] Review Request: ip6sic - IPv6 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: ip6sic - IPv6 Stack Integrity Checker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198586 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 09:03 EST --- The description was basically a simple copy-n-paste off the project page, but yeah, I suppose we don't really give a rip that it builds on OpenBSD. I'm importing a -2 revision with a sanitized description. Building for devel as I type, branching for FC5 requested. -- 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 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client
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: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |net)| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 09:27 EST --- The actual version of the spec file was changed according to comment #33. The only errors I see are the rpmlint error because I do not create a devel package (see above). -- 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 198245] Review Request: gnome-libs
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: gnome-libs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198245 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||200399 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 198562] Review Request: zabbix - Open-source monitoring solution for your IT infrastructure
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: zabbix - Open-source monitoring solution for your IT infrastructure https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198562 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 10:14 EST --- Deps on chkconfig and service added, misc other little spec clean-ups. http://wilsonet.com/packages/zabbix/zabbix.spec http://wilsonet.com/packages/zabbix/zabbix-1.1-2.fc6.src.rpm As for those rpmlint objdump failures, you aren't by chance running on an FC5 box, building in an FC6 mock chroot, are you? I just ran into this today myself. FC5 builds analyzed on FC5 work fine, but not the FC6 ones. If I scp the mock-built FC6 packages over to an up-to-date rawhide box, rpmlint does its thing without a problem. I believe this is due to recent glibc hash function changes that rpmlint/objdump on FC5 doesn't understand. -- 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 196945] Review Request: python-smbpasswd - Python SMB Password Hash Generator Module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-smbpasswd - Python SMB Password Hash Generator Module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196945 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 10:41 EST --- NEEDINFO requested of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chitlesh writes at clunixchit.blogspot.com that he will be on vacation until about the middle of August. -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 10:45 EST --- OK, we can wait. (: -- 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 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE
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: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 10:57 EST --- Arg... build is failing on the buildsys... I'm guessing due to an unstable ppc buildhost). python is crashing with illegal instruction. -- Job failed on arch noarch Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/13203-eric-3.9.1-2.fc6/ - _curses: importing ... modulename begins with _ _bsddb : importing ... modulename begins with _ dl : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file resource : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file _codecs_cn : importing ... modulename begins with _ _weakref : importing ... modulename begins with _ cStringIO : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file rgbimg : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file select : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file _heapq : importing ... modulename begins with _ crypt : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file _csv : importing ... modulename begins with _ syslog : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file _locale: importing ... modulename begins with _ math : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file regex : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file _testcapi : importing ... modulename begins with _ mmap : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file shm: importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file cPickle: importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file itertools : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file gdbm : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file binascii : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file md5: importing ... ok, processing ... ok, no source file _multibyt/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.26157: line 53: 11891 Illegal instruction /usr/bin/python gen_python_api.py /var/tmp/eric-3.9.1-2.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/share/eric/ error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.26157 (%install) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.26157 (%install) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE
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: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 10:58 EST --- For the record, it builds fine for me in mock for fc6 on an i386 buildhost. -- 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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 10:59 EST --- Bad : you need to define BuildArch : noarch rpmlint on the rpm gives E: script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/jokosher-0.1/userguide/jokosheruserguide.de.html rpmlint on the debuginfo gives E: empty-debuginfo-package I'm currently running mock over the package. You need to fix the above problems before you go any further as they're blockers. -- 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 200348] Review Request: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support 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: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200348 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 11:02 EST --- Thanks for the advicies: * as far as I know, license of libgadu is only LGPL See it's official site. :) * you should include COPYING file to %%doc, and also, include more docs in the main package, not in -devel COPYING file is not included in upstream tarball, and more docs are not useful (it's related only to ekg program) * I don't think using of libgadu-current.tar.gz is good. This file changes every day and md5sum of upstream source won't match md5 of source included in SRPM Have you any idea? * you should change doc files charset to utf8 (by iconv) OK, I'll do it, but please help me, I'm new to RPM. * change version in changelog entry. According to changelog inital release is 20060717-1, but in fact it is 20060726-1 Ops, my ommision, I will correct it in next release. -- 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 200152] Review Request: perl-POE-Component-Client-LDAP
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-POE-Component-Client-LDAP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200152 Bug 200152 depends on bug 200151, which changed state. Bug 200151 Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Wheel-Null https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200151 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197847] Review Request: pymsnt - MSN Transport for Jabber Servers
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: pymsnt - MSN Transport for Jabber Servers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197847 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 11:23 EST --- The group should be Applications/Communications. The status option doesn't work because start() does not create a pid file. Instead of running PyMSNt.py directly, it should run a shell script that invokes twistd with a .tac file, as IIRC the official source tarball does (unfortunately that seems to be unavailable atm). twistd will create the pid file. -- 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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 11:30 EST --- You're missing some requires as well - check http://www.jokosher.org/download for details. -- 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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 11:31 EST --- Mid-air collision, so here are some additional comments: * I suggest that upstream do not modify/extend/sublicence the GPL with exceptions, but rather put their distribution licence terms into a separate file. * Run rpmlint on the binary rpm. From the two errors it reports, one is valid. * Directory /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/jokosher/ is not included. * Why is it arch-specific and not BuildArch: noarch? * Upstream recommends GStreamer 0.10.9 or above and prefers a CVS snapshot. Requires: gstreamer = 0.10.8 does not reflect that. * Prefer install -p over cp to preserve time-stamps of files. * Run-time warning: Some functionality will not work correctly or at all. You must have the Python alsaaudio package installed. Please install python-alsaaudio or fetch from http://www.wilstrup.net/pyalsaaudio/. * Crashes reproducibly with below message. Steps to reproduce: 1) Start jokosher 2) Enter Preferences. 3) Click Close. 4) Click Create a new project. Starting up /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/jokosher/Jokosher.py:1054: GtkDeprecationWarning: gtk.threads_init is deprecated, use gtk.gdk.threads_init instead gtk.threads_init() 6783: assertion failed allocator-lock == mutex file dbus-dataslot.c line 82 function _dbus_data_slot_allocator_alloc Aborted -- 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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 11:39 EST --- The more I look into this package, the more odd it becomes. There is nothing (I can see) on the website as to the license Upstream recommending a cvs snapshot (moving target problems) Upstream not sticking totally to the GPL Sure, it looks a nice package, but as it stands, is it stable (upstream) enough to be in Extras? The functionality issues in #11 give me serious reasons to doubt it's inclusion at this time (though this could be down [again] to upstream or non-inclusion of R's on the rpm itself) -- 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 197847] Review Request: pymsnt - MSN Transport for Jabber Servers
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: pymsnt - MSN Transport for Jabber Servers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197847 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 12:04 EST --- Sigh. Ignore the above comments - I was assuming pymsnt still used twistd, which for some reason appears not to be the case. -- 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 200348] Review Request: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support 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: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200348 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 12:09 EST --- Thanks for the advices. I've updated spec. Spec URL: http://pmail.pl/~raven/libgadu.spec SRPM URL: http://pmail.pl/~raven/libgadu-20060726-1.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 199688] Review Request: virt-manager
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: virt-manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199688 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 12:20 EST --- This was built into rawhide. -- 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 200422] New: Review Request: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor)
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=200422 Summary: Review Request: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor) 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://cyberelk.net/tim/data/international-time/international-time.spec SRPM URL: http://cyberelk.net/tim/data/international-time/international-time-0.0.1-1.src.rpm Description: This is a graphical tool for converting a local wall-clock time into UTC. This is useful for arranging conference calls where participants from other countries are expected. -- 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 200422] Review Request: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor)
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: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200422 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 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 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 12:28 EST --- There are two primary reasons why we distribute Zaptel separately from the kernel source trees (and have not even offered them for inclusion in the source trees): 1) Zaptel supports both 2.4 and 2.6 kernel series, and many users will run 2.4 kernels but want access to driver fixes and drivers for new hardware as it arrives. Since the 2.4 kernel tree is essentially closed for new features, it's not likely we could get Zaptel merged into the 2.4 kernel tree, and thus we'd need to continue distributing it separately even if it was merged into the 2.6 tree (thus creating extra work for us to keep them in sync). As we move to supporting more the 2.6 kernel's new features in Zaptel, it's likely that we will discontinue support for the 2.4 kernel in the reasonably near feature, and at that time we can look at this issue again if it makes sense to do so. 2) Zaptel is available under both the GPLv2 license and also non-open-source commercial licenses negotiated with Digium. This means that contributions to Zaptel must be licensed for Digium to use them in non-open-source distributions, and thus we must strictly control the changes that get merged into the Zaptel source trees. If the Zaptel source was merged into the 2.6 kernel, there would be no method to continue this process (changes merged by other kernel developers would be made directly in the 2.6 tree, bypassing our licensing process), and the 2.6 tree version would begin to diverge from our dual-licensed version, which is not a situation we wish to be the case. I'm happy to provide any additional information that is needed here; we'd like to see Asterisk and Zaptel in Fedora Extras as well, so we'll do anything that's within reason to help achieve that goal :-) -- 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 200348] Review Request: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support 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: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200348 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 12:29 EST --- Sorry, I didn't remember to add changelog entry and bump release. Spec URL: http://pmail.pl/~raven/libgadu.spec SRPM URL: http://pmail.pl/~raven/libgadu-20060726-2.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 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX
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: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 13:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #48) any chance for a update to 1.2.10 for asterisk? http://repo.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2/fedora/5/SRPMS/asterisk-1.2.10-1.fc5.spec http://repo.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2/fedora/5/SRPMS/asterisk-1.2.10-1.fc5.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 195363] Review Request: esc
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: esc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195363 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 13:16 EST --- Thanks! The pwd is a mistake. As for removing the directory, Xulrunner leaves some stuff behind in the directory that does not get removed when the RPM is un-installed. I figured that we would not want to have the directory lying around. -- 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 200436] New: Review Request: gaim-gadugadu - Gadu-Gadu support in Gaim IM client
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=200436 Summary: Review Request: gaim-gadugadu - Gadu-Gadu support in Gaim IM client 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://pmail.pl/~raven/gaim-gadugadu.spec SRPM URL: http://pmail.pl/~raven/gaim-gadgadu-2.0.0-0.7.beta3.src.rpm Description: Hi, it's one of my first packages and I'm looking for sponsor. :) gaim-gadugadu package allows you to use Gadu-Gadu protocol in Gaim instant messaging client. -- 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 200436] Review Request: gaim-gadugadu - Gadu-Gadu support in Gaim IM client
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: gaim-gadugadu - Gadu-Gadu support in Gaim IM client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200436 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||200348 OtherBugsDependingO||177841 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 200348] Review Request: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support 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: libgadu - Gadu-Gadu protocol support library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||200436 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 200438] New: Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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=200438 Summary: Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project 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://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme.spec SRPM URL: http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme-0.7.2-1.src.rpm Description: Hi, it's one of my first packages and I'm looking for sponsor. :) tango icon-theme package contains icons form Tango Project. -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 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 200310] Review Request: pyicqt - ICQ transport for Jabber servers
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: pyicqt - ICQ transport for Jabber servers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200310 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 13:54 EST --- Good: + Tar ball match with upstream. + Local build works fine. + No complaints for source rpm from rpmlint + No complaints for binaries rpm from rpmlint. + Mock build works fine. Bad: - Tar file has the name pyicq-t but the package is called pyicqt. - when I start /etc/init.d/pyicqtt start, I will got the following message: /etc/init.d/pyicqt start Starting ICQ transport: /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/words/__init__.py:21: UserWarning: twisted.words will be undergoing a rewrite at some point in the future. warnings.warn(twisted.words will be undergoing a rewrite at some point in the future.) -- 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 200422] Review Request: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor)
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: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200422
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:08 EST ---
Hi Tim,
A couple of comments:
* The preferred value for the BuildRoot tag is
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n). This is not a
requirement for approval, though.
* desktop-file-install is usually (always?) called using --vendor fedora and
--add-category X-Fedora.
* rpmlint has a few complaints (none of them serious):
W: international-time summary-ended-with-dot
W: international-time no-url-tag
W: international-time no-documentation
* You can drop the 'pygtk2' requirement since 'pygtk2-libglade' already depends
on it. Also, it seems rpm already adds a dependency on /usr/bin/python
automatically so the 'python' requirement might be redundant... but I'm not
really sure.
--
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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:31 EST ---
I can't sponsor you, but I'll give you something very review-like:
1. includes
BuildRequires: icon-naming-utils = 0.7.2
but that isn't in Core or Extras (yet).
2. scriptlets should be:
%post
touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/Tango 2 /dev/null ||:
gtk-update-icon-cache -q %{_datadir}/icons/Tango 2 /dev/null ||:
%postun
touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/Tango 2 /dev/null ||:
gtk-update-icon-cache -q %{_datadir}/icons/Tango 2 /dev/null ||:
--
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 198829] Review Request: wfmath - WorldForge math libraries
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: wfmath - WorldForge math libraries Alias: wfmath https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198829 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:31 EST --- I disabled 'make check' on ppc until upstream can provide a fix. Now that this has been imported and built on devel I'm closing the ticket. -- 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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:31 EST --- noarch doesn't create a debuginfo package. Can you upload a new spec and src.rpm when you've fixed the other issues please? -- 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 198833] Review Request: mercator - Terrain library for WorldForge client/server
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: mercator - Terrain library for WorldForge client/server Alias: mercator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198833 Bug 198833 depends on bug 198829, which changed state. Bug 198829 Summary: Review Request: wfmath - WorldForge math libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198829 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:42 EST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz (or sometimes with something after %{version} such
as
-rc2.tar.gz). This is what Source has to point to.
Fixed.
(In reply to comment #10)
You're missing some requires as well - check http://www.jokosher.org/download
for details.
Fixed. Alsaaudio is not a strict requirement for the operation of jokosher and
the next version will not require it at all. However I will consider packaging
it if necessary.
(In reply to comment #11)
* I suggest that upstream do not modify/extend/sublicence the GPL with
exceptions, but rather put their distribution licence terms into a separate
file.
I have mentioned this on the development list.
* Run rpmlint on the binary rpm. From the two errors it reports, one is valid.
Now fixed.
* Directory /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/jokosher/ is not included.
Please could you clarify.
* Why is it arch-specific and not BuildArch: noarch?
Now fixed.
* Upstream recommends GStreamer 0.10.9 or above and prefers a CVS snapshot.
Requires: gstreamer = 0.10.8 does not reflect that.
Now fixed.
* Prefer install -p over cp to preserve time-stamps of files.
Now fixed - yes this is much better, thanks.
* Run-time warning:
Some functionality will not work correctly or at all.
You must have the Python alsaaudio package installed.
Please install python-alsaaudio or fetch from
http://www.wilstrup.net/pyalsaaudio/.
See above.
* Crashes reproducibly with below message. Steps to reproduce:
1) Start jokosher
2) Enter Preferences.
3) Click Close.
4) Click Create a new project.
Starting up
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/jokosher/Jokosher.py:1054:
GtkDeprecationWarning: gtk.threads_init is deprecated, use gtk.gdk.threads_init
instead
gtk.threads_init()
6783: assertion failed allocator-lock == mutex file dbus-dataslot.c line 82
function _dbus_data_slot_allocator_alloc
Aborted
I cannot reproduce this however I am running the latest gstreamer and gnonlin
releases although I fail to see how that would alter things. This has not been
reported on the support forums or lists to my knowledge. Perhaps the latest spec
file and requires fixes this. py-dbus maybe?
(In reply to comment #12)
The more I look into this package, the more odd it becomes.
There is nothing (I can see) on the website as to the license
Upstream recommending a cvs snapshot (moving target problems)
Gstreamer have now made a release so no longer dependent on cvs. Gnonlin also
anticipated doing the same in the near future however again, current gnonlin
will work, just not with full features.
Upstream not sticking totally to the GPL
This has been mentioned to the devs. I would appreciate comments on how much of
a showstopper this is and how to get around it of there is no altering the
stance of how it is licensed upstream.
Sure, it looks a nice package, but as it stands, is it stable (upstream)
enough
to be in Extras?
I would say yes in the spirit of release early and often. This is not an
admittance of buggy software - the two main issues users currently experience
are due to current version of gstreamer and gnonlin, both of which Requires
indicates.
The functionality issues in #11 give me serious reasons to doubt it's
inclusion
at this time (though this could be down [again] to upstream or non-inclusion
of
R's on the rpm itself)
I hope the above gives you cause to re-think. I would be happy to see it wait
until fc6 for inclusion. Thanks again for the advice.
Regards
Chris
--
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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:43 EST --- 3. Per http://tango.freedesktop.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions use License: Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike -- 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 195363] Review Request: esc
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: esc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195363 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:43 EST --- comps should be group 'gnome-desktop' default. bob -- 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 198833] Review Request: mercator - Terrain library for WorldForge client/server
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: mercator - Terrain library for WorldForge client/server Alias: mercator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198833 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:47 EST --- This has been built now that the wfmath issue has been temporarily resolved. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198839] Review Request: sear - WorldForge client
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: sear - WorldForge client Alias: sear https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198839 Bug 198839 depends on bug 198833, which changed state. Bug 198833 Summary: Review Request: mercator - Terrain library for WorldForge client/server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198833 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198839] Review Request: sear - WorldForge client
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: sear - WorldForge client Alias: sear https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198839 Bug 198839 depends on bug 198837, which changed state. Bug 198837 Summary: Review Request: eris - Client-side session layer for Atlas-C++ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198837 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198837] Review Request: eris - Client-side session layer for Atlas-C++
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: eris - Client-side session layer for Atlas-C++ Alias: eris https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198837 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:49 EST --- This has been built now that wfmath is available. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 200310] Review Request: pyicqt - ICQ transport for Jabber servers
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: pyicqt - ICQ transport for Jabber servers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200310 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:52 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Good: + Tar ball match with upstream. + Local build works fine. + No complaints for source rpm from rpmlint + No complaints for binaries rpm from rpmlint. + Mock build works fine. Bad: - Tar file has the name pyicq-t but the package is called pyicqt. I'll change that in the next rev... - when I start /etc/init.d/pyicqtt start, I will got the following message: /etc/init.d/pyicqt start Starting ICQ transport: /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/words/__init__.py:21: UserWarning: twisted.words will be undergoing a rewrite at some point in the future. warnings.warn(twisted.words will be undergoing a rewrite at some point in the future.) Yeah, I get that too. Until the pyicq-t authors update their code, I don't know what can be done, as this message is generated by twisted: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# python Python 2.4.3 (#1, Jun 13 2006, 16:41:18) [GCC 4.0.2 20051125 (Red Hat 4.0.2-8)] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. import twisted.words /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/words/__init__.py:21: UserWarning: twisted.words will be undergoing a rewrite at some point in the future. warnings.warn(twisted.words will be undergoing a rewrite at some point in the future.) -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:53 EST --- Re: icon-naming-utils It would probably be best if the same person maintained both icon-naming-utils and tango-icon-theme. You can use what I've got for a starting point there (if you don't have it already): http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/icon-naming-utils.spec (and for reference and pointers http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/tango-icon-theme.spec ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 14:59 EST --- icon-naming-utils is in core and rawhide sports version 0.7.3 http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/icon-naming-utils/ -- 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 195363] Review Request: esc
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: esc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195363 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:03 EST --- what kind of files? you can't just remove directories on users systems (what if they put something in it?). -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:09 EST --- Comment #1: Thanks for the scriptlets. #2: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint tango-icon-theme-0.7.2-1.src.rpm W: tango-icon-theme invalid-license Creative Commons Attribution Share-AlikeCan #3: Can someone add it to FC5 updates-released (or testing)? -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:17 EST --- icon-naming-utils is in core and rawhide sports version 0.7.3 Coolness, how did I miss that? (: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint tango-icon-theme-0.7.2-1.src.rpm W: tango-icon-theme invalid-license Creative Commons Attribution Share-AlikeCan Regardless, that *is* the license (and it is valid, regardless of rpmlint's whininess) #3: Can someone add it to FC5 updates-released (or testing)? To what are you referring when you say it? -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:24 EST --- Regardless, that *is* the license (and it is valid, regardless of rpmlint's whininess) OK, you are right. To what are you referring when you say it? icon-naming-utils, of course. Sorry for my poor English... New spec and SRPM: http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme.spec http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme-0.7.2-2.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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:29 EST --- To what are you referring when you say it? icon-naming-utils, of course. Sorry for my poor English... Very little chance, new packages aren't (usually) added to the distro after it's been released. That doesn't preclude it's appearance in fc5/Extras. Back to the package, would you consider building with ./configure --enable-png-creation (it helps out kde users) -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:43 EST --- Very little chance, new packages aren't (usually) added to the distro after it's been released. That doesn't preclude it's appearance in fc5/Extras. Sorry for my English again. When I said add to updates, I meant update to 0.7.3, because this package is in FC5, but in old version (0.6.7). Back to the package, would you consider building with ./configure --enable-png-creation (it helps out kde users) No problem. -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:50 EST --- I meant update to 0.7.3, because this package is in FC5, but in old version (0.6.7). Open a bugzilla report, and request and update (and tell them why, you need it for tango-icon-theme on fc5/Extras) -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 15:55 EST --- Isn't the tango icons already in Rawhide? Why else would the icon-naming-utils be in Core? -- 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 191389] Review Request: oooqs2
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: oooqs2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191389 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 16:06 EST --- SPEC URL: http://ausil.us/packages/oooqs2.spec SRPM URL: http://ausil.us/packages/oooqs2-1.0-2.fc5.src.rpm added the COPYING File added the patch for Russian desktop file translation the dangling symlinks cant fix the files they point to are provided by kdelibs and the language packs this is extremely common in kde packages. the relative symlinks are fixed -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 16:08 EST --- afaict, tango is not is rawhide. Dunno why icon-naming-utils is in Core, but it's been there since FC-5 -- 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 184331] Review Request: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system
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: K-3D - 3D modeling and rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184331 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 16:26 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) (In reply to comment #10) (In reply to comment #8) - I folded the devel package into the main package since there's not much sense in having the split (since otherwise the main package would have to Require it). Very bad move. Please revert this change and split into *-devel and *non-devel, again. If the main package would have to require it, it sounds like the files in the devel package (at least some of them) aren't really devel files. This package seems to contain shared libs, dll-modules/plugins and headers. What was in the devel package that's needed by the main package? Is there anything that was in the devel package that's *not* needed by the main package? I presume the OP had mixed up *.so symlinks and dll-modules/plugins. -- 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 191017] Review Request: eclipse-subclipse
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: eclipse-subclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191017 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 16:43 EST --- It would be nice to get this pacakge reviewed with the patch in place. I'm still planning to track down the problem, but it is is a *very* complex GCJ problem. Also, I won't get time until mid August. Robert, are you ok with this? -- 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 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop
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: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 16:50 EST --- Spec Name or Url: http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/monodevelop.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/monodevelop-0.11-13.src.rpm *should* sort out the 64 bit problem in #52 -- 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 200374] Review Request: qstat - Real-time Game Server Status for Quake servers
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: qstat - Real-time Game Server Status for Quake servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200374
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:08 EST ---
A few small points before I get to a full review:
You don't need the check for / when you clean the buildroot in %install and
%clean. A simple rm -rf will suffice:
rm -rf %{buildroot}
The -n %{name}-%{version} is unnecessary. %setup already uses this as a
default.
The %attr statements for qstat.cfg and the qstat binary are also not necessary
as these permissions/ownership are already used.
qstat can be used for more than just quake servers, so remove 'quake' from the
summary line. You could replace it with 'FPS game' instead.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:09 EST --- Open a bugzilla report, and request and update (and tell them why, you need it for tango-icon-theme on fc5/Extras) Thanks for all your help. :) (bug 200457) Back to the package, would you consider building with ./configure --enable-png-creation (it helps out kde users) Done, new spec and SRPM: http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme.spec http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme-0.7.2-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 200374] Review Request: qstat - Real-time Game Server Status for Quake servers
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: qstat - Real-time Game Server Status for Quake servers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200374 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 197565] Review Request: buildbot
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: buildbot https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197565 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:19 EST --- Updated: Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/buildbot.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/buildbot-0.7.3-3.src.rpm Moved the contribs to /usr/share/buildbot/contribs Thanks for that suggestion! -- 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 195363] Review Request: esc
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: esc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195363 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:23 EST --- Excellent point. I will remove that entry. -- 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 199611] Review Request: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper
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: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199611 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:39 EST --- Ian, you have imported package on CVS, but why haven't you built it? -- 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 191017] Review Request: eclipse-subclipse
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: eclipse-subclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191017 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:39 EST --- Unfortunately that patch doesn't apply to the spec in http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/subclipse/eclipse-subclipse-1.0.3-2.src.rpm I don't think I botched it when I applied it manually. However, now there are dependency issues; ganymed-ssh2 and javasvn need rebuilds against libgcj.so.7. Is it reasonable to build against FC5 here? -- 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 195363] Review Request: esc
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: esc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195363 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:44 EST --- (In reply to comment #27) comps should be group 'gnome-desktop' default. bob Added to comps. Please close when package is built for rawhide. -- 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 193240] Review Request: XaraLX - Vector/general purpose graphics utility
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: XaraLX - Vector/general purpose graphics utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193240 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:45 EST --- I will review this one. Review for release 1.r1564: * RPM name is OK * Source XaraLX-0.7r1564.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream Needs work: * BuildRequires: perl should not be included (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#Exceptions) * Build failed in mock autoreconf: failed to run autopoint: No such file or directory Minor: * Duplicate BuildRequires: automake (by libtool), autoconf (by libtool), perl (by automake), gtk2-devel (by wxGTK-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 191017] Review Request: eclipse-subclipse
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: eclipse-subclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191017 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:48 EST --- Never mind; ganymed-ssh2 isn't build for FC5. So there's pretty much no way this can be reviewed right now. -- 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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:55 EST --- You should be able to drop the BR on ImageMagick librsvg2, since the respective devel packages sonames should pull these in. -- 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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 17:58 EST ---
(In reply to comment #16)
If the way the GPL is messed with adds restrictions, it causes major problems.
If it removes restrictions, that's fine. My reading is it adds.
If the exceptions are placed into a separate file, would this resolve the
matter? My reading is that it permits people to use non-GPL compatible plugins
and therefore is not adding restrictions but IANAL.
The problem with release often and early is that you get releases which
haven't
had the time to mature and be debugged correctly. I've known of many security
problems with that system.
The only comment I can make here is that this version has few known bugs and
most of those are outside of its control. One reason the package is being pushed
for inclusion in Extras is so that upstream can garner more feedback and improve
Q.A. which will surely help with debugging. As for security problems I really
cannot comment except to say this is an audio editor written in python using Gtk
widgets, not say, a driver with kernel hooks.
* Directory /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/jokosher/ is not included.
Please could you clarify.
The application creates a directory (via the define) in the
python/site-packages/ directory called jokosher. You need in your %files
%{python_dir}/site-packages/jokosher
Fixed.
You're missing some requires as well - check
http://www.jokosher.org/download
for details.
Fixed. Alsaaudio is not a strict requirement for the operation of jokosher and
the next version will not require it at all. However I will consider packaging
it if necessary.
Depending on the timeframe of this packages possible acceptance into FE, I'd
look into importing it. It won't harm.
A small patch (which only just missed the 0.1 release deadline) has now removed
this dependency on alsaaudio.
http://jokosher.python-hosting.com/changeset/466
I have updated the package and spec file accordingly and bumped the version.
I can also replicate the dbus error on my 64 and 32 bit systems. This will
need
to be looked into.
I have posted on this and will get back to you. Would you please in the meantime
avail us of your dbus version which you can get with:
$ python -c import dbus; print dbus.version
Regards
Chris
--
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 200438] Review Request: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project
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: tango-icon-theme - Icons from Tango Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 18:07 EST --- Thanks, new spec and SRPM: http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme.spec http://pmail.pl/~raven/tango-icon-theme-0.7.2-4.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 199611] Review Request: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper
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: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199611 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 18:36 EST --- I was waiting for the additional branches :-) It's building now. -- 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 200472] New: Review Request: perl-POE-Component-SNMP
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=200472 Summary: Review Request: perl-POE-Component-SNMP 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://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-POE-Component-SNMP.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-POE-Component-SNMP-1.05-1.fc5.src.rpm Description: POE::Component::SNMP is a POE-ized wrapper around the the Net::SNMP module. Most of its arguments aren't even evaluated by POE, except for -alias and -callback_args, as described in the manpage. If you want to make non-blocking calls with Net::SNMP in a POE application, this is the module to do it with. -- 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 194566] Review Request: 915resolution
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: 915resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194566
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 18:40 EST ---
Let's make a start
# will be set to -1 on build/release
Release:0%{?dist}
The release should reflect the release (in other words, the build number). It
goes up, not down
%description ends in a .
I can't see how this package would be instantated by the host machine. Is it
supposed to be called directly, as a service or needing integration into
xorg.conf (or similar)?
--
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 199029] Review Request: jokosher
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: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 18:43 EST --- Change the license to GPL with exceptions The dbus version comes back with (0, 51, 0) Can you please upload a new spec and src rpm for review? -- 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 194566] Review Request: 915resolution
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: 915resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194566
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 18:51 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Let's make a start
# will be set to -1 on build/release
Release:0%{?dist}
The release should reflect the release (in other words, the build number). It
goes up, not down
Sorry, that could have been more clearly expressed... It'll go to one.
%description ends in a .
Isn't this only %summary which shouldn't end in a period?
I can't see how this package would be instantated by the host machine. Is it
supposed to be called directly, as a service or needing integration into
xorg.conf (or similar)?
Right now, it's up to the user to configure. I call it with the correct
resolution values at boot in /etc/rc.local, for instance. It would certainly be
possible to wrap the entire thing in a service, but 1) that would still require
user configuration as to which video modes to override, and 2) it's not worth
that effort given the xorg driver has been in a state of not needing this real
soon now for the last several months.
--
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 199611] Review Request: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper
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: monsterz - Puzzle game, similar to Bejeweled or Zookeeper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199611 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 194566] Review Request: 915resolution
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: 915resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 18:55 EST --- The release should already be one as soon as you package the original version. Not sure about the user to configure bit. Personally, I'd wrap it in a service and install a set of default modes (they can all be commented out). At least everything is in place when the xorg driver gets out of the stable and into the big, bad world. -- 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
