[Bug 441072] Review Request: cwiid - Library and tools for comunicating with a wiimote
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: cwiid - Library and tools for comunicating with a wiimote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441072 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 02:31 EST --- (For review request please leave assignee to the reviewer. Just changing assignee) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 441072] Review Request: cwiid - Library and tools for comunicating with a wiimote
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: cwiid - Library and tools for comunicating with a wiimote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441072 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437667] Review Request: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter
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: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437667 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:23 EST --- Patrice - I've put you as a co-maintainer, but I just realized that you wrote I am ok to be in initialCC and commit messages. - does that mean you don't want to be a co-maintainer for this package? I hope I can convince you to remain as a co-maintainer. jindrich - I added you as a co-maintainer - shout if you don't want to be. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437667] Review Request: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter
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: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437667 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:21 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: dvipdfm Short Description: A DVI to PDF converter Owners: jgu pertusus jnovy Branches: F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: Yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426985] Review Request: php-suhosin - Suhosin extension for the php language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-suhosin - Suhosin extension for the php language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426985 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:33 EST --- Update spec file and srpm is available at http://bart.ulyssis.org/fedora/php-suhosin/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:32 EST --- (In reply to comment #25) Okay, I'm content to say that it's my system (F8 with lots of odd Eclipse stuff on it) that's causing my missing-variables-in-debug-perspective issue if you can see them. If we run into issues, we can fix them later. This package is APPROVED. Thanks, Mat! Don't forget to take EPIC off the Packaging/Wishlist on the Fedora wiki :) Will do, cheers! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:34 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: eclipse-epic Short Description: Perl Eclipse plugin Owners: mbooth Branches: F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 225792] Merge Review: gfs2-utils
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: gfs2-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225792 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:44 EST --- I added the Requires(preun): /sbin/service line as you'd suggested so what else do I need to do in order to satisfy item 6? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437667] Review Request: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter
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: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437667 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 04:52 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) Patrice - I've put you as a co-maintainer, but I just realized that you wrote I am ok to be in initialCC and commit messages. - does that mean you don't want to be a co-maintainer for this package? It indeed means that I agree to be co-maintainer. But to me when cvsextra people can commit and I am in intialCC and commit messages I consider to have the needed rights for a co-maintainer, since I think it is the primary maintainer duty to use his approveacls power. But I don't mind having full powers either... I hope I can convince you to remain as a co-maintainer. I am convinced ;-) jindrich - I added you as a co-maintainer - shout if you don't want to be. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444574] New: Review Request: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message
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/show_bug.cgi?id=444574 Summary: Review Request: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://pidgin-lastfm.naturalnet.de/download/rpm/pidgin-lastfm.spec SRPM URL: http://pidgin-lastfm.naturalnet.de/download/rpm/pidgin-lastfm-0.3a-1.src.rpm Description: This plugin for the Pidgin multi-protocol instant messenger displays information from a user's Last.fm profile in the status message. The most important information might be the most recently scrobbled song. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444574] Review Request: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message
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: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444574 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 441072] Review Request: cwiid - Library and tools for comunicating with a wiimote
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: cwiid - Library and tools for comunicating with a wiimote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441072 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 06:45 EST --- Ops, sorry, didn't know this rule. :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437667] Review Request: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter
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: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437667 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 07:43 EST --- Ok, just writing a comment to let you know I have this on the radar :) Feel free to propose what needs to be done on the texlive side/mostly when is the right time to remove dvipdfm from texlive. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 07:55 EST --- Mat: I'd appreciate this in F-8. If you have a reason not to maintain it there, I'd gladly do so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 436637] Review Request: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image
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: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436637 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 08:40 EST --- Seems good to me. However I wonder if we can move disktype to sbindir instead of bindir: from the disttype man: . Note that running disktype on device files like your hard disk will likely require root rights. We usually move this kind of app to sbindir Note that the libewf patch expect libewf header to be in /usr/local/include/libewf.h It is currenly available in /usr/include which is the default path, so it won't hurt. But the nicest tweak would be to use pkg-config libewf cflags and pkg-config libewf --libs (for the libs side). This would lead to have : in the %prep section sed -i -e 's|-I/usr/local/include|%(pkg-config libewf --cflags)|' Makefile sed -i -e 's|-L/usr/local/lib||' Makefile sed -i -e 's|-lewf|%(pkg-config libewf --libs)|' Makefile Note that the current version in F-9 will not handle this nicely as openssl-devel is missing from libewf-devel (you may need to add it from disktype, but i think it won't be required - I've asked libewf upstream to sort this and i guess it will be removed on the next libewf bugfix update planned for the end of the weak). (This problem was my bad - sorry - for now it is safe to handle the way you do until libewf is fixed - it won't be possible to link to the F-8 version anyway as BSD advertissing close remains present). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426867] Review Request: scala - Hybrid functional/object-oriented language
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: scala - Hybrid functional/object-oriented language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426867 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 08:43 EST --- Before spot comments on this: Build itself failed (check root.log) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=586180 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444601] New: Review Request: pem - Pem is personal expenses manager
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/show_bug.cgi?id=444601 Summary: Review Request: pem - Pem is personal expenses manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/pem.spec SRPM URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/pem-0.7.1-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Pem, is personal expenses manager. Pem lets keep track of personal income and expense in an extremely elegant manner -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 225792] Merge Review: gfs2-utils
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: gfs2-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225792 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 10:39 EST --- Simply make your preun: %preun if [ $1 = 0 ]; then /sbin/service gfs2 stop /dev/null 21 /sbin/chkconfig --del script fi Ie, stop the service before removing the init script and package... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 225792] Merge Review: gfs2-utils
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: gfs2-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225792 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 10:47 EST --- Ah, I see now. I'll add that on the next update. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 432259] Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO
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: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:03 EST --- For 0.6.6-6: * License http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines - I checked the license of speech-dispatcher and * The base license of this is GPLv2+ * src/c/clients/spdsend/spdsend.h in the tarball is under GPL, which makes %_bindir/spdsend to be GPLv2: So * Please change the license tag of all packages except speech-dispatcher (main) pkg to GPLv2+ * For speech-dispatcher, write in the spec file like below: --- Group: System Environment/Libraries # Almost all files are under GPLv2+, however # src/c/clients/spdsend/spdsend.h is licensed under GPLv2, # which makes %%_bindir/spdsend GPLv2. License:GPLv2+ and GPLv2 URL:http://www.freebsoft.org/pub/projects/speechd/ --- * Requires(%post,etc) - Why are /sbin/chkconfig, /sbin/service needed for Requires(%post,etc)? * %install process - Would you clean up %install scripts (like following)? --- for dir in \ config doc src/audio c . do pushd $dir make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT popd done --- * Documents - Adding COPYING to %doc is rather mandatory if it exists. * rpmlint issue --- speech-dispatcher-doc.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/info/speech-dispatcher-cs.info.gz speech-dispatcher-devel.i386: W: no-documentation speech-dispatcher-python.i386: W: no-documentation speech-dispatcher.i386: E: non-empty-%postun /sbin/ldconfig speech-dispatcher-python.i386: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/speechd/_test.py 0644 speech-dispatcher.i386: E: postun-without-ldconfig /usr/lib/libspeechd.so.2.0.5 --- Summary - Please change the encodings of the files in warning to UTF-8. - Scripts without execution permission should not have shebangs - For /sbin/ldconfig error: --- %post -p /sbin/ldconfig %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig # # MAIN PACKAGE FILES # %files --- If you write any comments %postun and %files, this is interpreted that you want to execute the script with the content written as a comment _with the interpreter /sbin/ldconfig_ , which is wrong. In short When just calling /sbin/ldconfig on %post(un,etc) scriptlets in one line, don't write any comments after that. * Binary name - IMO the names of the binaries --- %_bindir/long_message %_bindir/run_test --- are too generic. Would you rename these binaries? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 433477] Review Request: guake - Drop-down terminal for 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: guake - Drop-down terminal for GNOME https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433477 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 |201449 nThis|| Status|NEEDINFO|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |mail.com) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:06 EST --- Once closing. If someone wants to import this package into Fedora, please file a new review request and mark this bug a duplicate of the new one. Thank you! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 416461] Review Request: xmms-pulse - XMMS output plugin for the PulseAudio sound 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: xmms-pulse - XMMS output plugin for the PulseAudio sound server. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=416461 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||.com) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:09 EST --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:10 EST --- I've fixed another issue in this RPM where an implied dependency on /usr/bin/ruby1.8 was created by some scripts. The spec file now replaces the shebang with /usr/bin/ruby as the dependency. This is in rev. 6 of the SRPM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 240008] Review Request: ruby-shadow - ruby bindings for shadow password access
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: ruby-shadow - ruby bindings for shadow password access https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=240008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:12 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 248277] Review Request: mt-daapd - An iTunes-compatible media 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: mt-daapd - An iTunes-compatible media server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=248277 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:14 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) This is in rev. 6 of the SRPM. It is very useful to post a new URL for the updated SRPM. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:18 EST --- cvs done. Let me know if you want a F-8 branch and who should own it... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:24 EST --- Sorry. The URLs are: Spec: http://mcpierce.dyndns.org/~mcpierce/rubygem-activeldap.spec SRPM: http://mcpierce.dyndns.org/~mcpierce/rubygem-activeldap-0.10.0-6.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437667] Review Request: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter
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: dvipdfm - A DVI to PDF converter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437667 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:25 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444315] mousetweaks - Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: mousetweaks - Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444315
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:35 EST ---
$ rpmlint mousetweaks-2.22.1-1.fc9.src.rpm
mousetweaks.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 21, tab: line 1)
$ rpmlint
/home/hadess/Projects/packages/RPMS/x86_64/mousetweaks-2.22.1-1.fc8.x86_64.rpm
mousetweaks.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/gconf/schemas/mousetweaks.schemas
mousetweaks.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/gconf/schemas/pointer-capture-applet.schemas
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK
- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is unable
to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora is not
the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest (http://www.ioccc.org/).
OK
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
OK
- MUST: If the package does not successfully compile snip
N/A
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun. If the package has multiple subpackages with libraries, each
subpackage should also have a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig.
N/A
- MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
N/A
- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.
OK
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK.
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is described
in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity)
OK
- MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
OK
- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A
- MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A
- MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for
directory ownership and usability).
N/A
- MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
[Bug 438039] Review Request: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT
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: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438039 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:56 EST --- *** Bug 438041 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438039] Review Request: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT
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: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438039 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:55 EST --- Checked in and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438043] Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438043 Bug 438043 depends on bug 438039, which changed state. Bug 438039 Summary: Review Request: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438039 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438041] Review Request: GMT-coastlines-full - Full resolution coastline data for GMT
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: GMT-coastlines-full - Full resolution coastline data for GMT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438041 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:56 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 438039 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 434906] Review Request: xosview - OS resource viewer
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: xosview - OS resource viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434906
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:56 EST ---
For 1.8.3.cvsXXX-8:
* Versioning
- Well actually 1.8.3-cvs-8 is against Fedora naming guidelines.
Please check the subsection Snapshot packages of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines
The recommended EVR is 1.8.3-X.YYYcvs%{?dist}
* %configure
- %configure sets CXXFLAGS. You can check what %configure does by
$ rpm --eval %configure .
So for this package the following is enough.
--
%build
./autogen.sh
%configure
%{__make} %{?_smp_mflags} all
.
--
Then as this is NEEDSPONSOR ticket, as I said in
my comment 11 I wait for your another review request submission
or your pre-review of other review request.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 431161] Review Request: mathmap - A gimp plugin and commandline tool
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: mathmap - A gimp plugin and commandline tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431161 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:58 EST --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438039] Review Request: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT
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: GMT-coastlines - Coastline data for GMT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438039 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:56 EST --- *** Bug 438040 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438195] Review Request: wgrib2 - Wgrib for GRIB-2
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: wgrib2 - Wgrib for GRIB-2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438195 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438040] Review Request: GMT-coastlines-high - High resolution coastline data for GMT
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: GMT-coastlines-high - High resolution coastline data for GMT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438040 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:56 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 438039 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 433925] Review Request: libyahoo2 - Library for the Yahoo! Messenger Protocol
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: libyahoo2 - Library for the Yahoo! Messenger Protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433925
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 11:57 EST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
*Full path to source tarball still missing. You must specify full path to
source's tarball, not only %{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2. For SF-hosted projects
we
have special requirements for %Source field - take a look at this page (at the
bottom):
Argh, meant to fix that last time. :-) Updated SRPM here:
http://www.bludgeon.org/~rayvd/rpms/libyahoo2/libyahoo2-0.7.6-2.src.rpm
SPEC URL is the same. Appreciate the catch on that.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438043] Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438043 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||444625 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444625] New: Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444625 Summary: Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/GMT-docs SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/GMT-docs-4.2.1-1.src.rpm Description: This package provides the documentation for the GMT (Generic Mapping Tools) package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 432259] Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO
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: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 12:41 EST --- Also please fix %_infodir/dir file issue. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 12:45 EST --- rpmlint is down to: rubygem-activeldap.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 43, tab: line 10) rubygem-activeldap.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activeldap-0.10.0/examples/al-admin/public/dispatch.cgi 0644 rubygem-activeldap.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activeldap-0.10.0/examples/al-admin/test/run-test.sh 0644 rubygem-activeldap.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activeldap-0.10.0/examples/al-admin/public/dispatch.fcgi 0644 rubygem-activeldap.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activeldap-0.10.0/examples/al-admin/public/dispatch.rb 0644 Can you resolve those? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 12:52 EST ---
For 0.11-1: (please change EVR from next time)
* Redundant BuildRequires
- gc-devel Requires gc so BuildRequires: libgc is redundant
* Requires
- Please check all required packages are specified by Requires
(except for library dependencies which are automatically added
to binary rpms by rpmbuild).
For example, %{py_sitearch}/Synopsis/Formatters/DocBook/Markup/RST.py
contains the lines:
-
10 from docutils import writers, nodes, languages
11 from docutils.nodes import *
12 from docutils.core import *
13 from docutils.parsers.rst import roles
-
This means synopsis should have Requires: python-docutils.
* Macros
--
--with-gc-prefix=%{prefix}
--
- This must be %{_prefix}
* %doc attribute
- Files under %_docdir or %_mandir are automatically marked
as %doc.
* %defattr
- We now recommend %defattr(-.root,root,-)
* Directory ownership issue
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/doc/synopsis-0.11/COPYING
synopsis-0.11-1.fc9.i386
synopsis-devel-0.11-1.fc9.i386
synopsis-idl-0.11-1.fc9.i386
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/doc/synopsis-0.11/
file /usr/share/doc/synopsis-0.11 is not owned by any package
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$
--
- The directory %_docdir/%name-%version is not owned by any package.
* Other rpmlint issue:
--
synopsis.i386: W: one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig
synopsis.i386: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig
synopsis.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/libSynopsis.so.0.11
--
Summary
- When only calling /sbin/ldconfig is needed for %post(%postun),
write them in one line and avoid unneeded shell execution as
--
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%posun -p /sbin/ldconfig
--
- %_libdir/libSynopsis.so.XXX.YYY is not stripped.
/usr/lib/rpm/find-debuginfo.sh checks and strips binaries
with execution permission only, and on Fedora generally all
libraries in %_libdir should have 0755 permission.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 254058] Review Request: e16-themes - Themes for Enlightenment, DR16
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: e16-themes - Themes for Enlightenment, DR16 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=254058 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 13:12 EST --- None of those are really blockers. If you can check on the zero-length files and ping upstream before importing that would be great. I tried with the winter theme in e16 proper package and got a freeze, seems like they are really needed. This package is APPROVED. Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: e16-themes Short Description: Themes for Enlightenment, DR16 Owners: terjeros Branches: F-7 F-8 F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438043] Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438043
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 13:30 EST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Could it be possible to have the doc package submitted in parallel?
GMT-docs package review is bug 444625
You should look at my package for the removal of a non-free
file.
Added. Upstream has committed to releasing a free source version next
release.
I find the octave patch a bit strange, since it uses matlab
support. Could it be possible to have it additionally, such that
it can be submitted upstream?
I mentioned it upstream, but I think upstream needs to move to using autotools
(or cmake or similar) in the src/mex directory first to allow for build time
configuration.
Your octave packaging is not the same than the one proposed at:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Octave
but at that page there are mistakes.
Yeah, but this is not a real octave package.
There is no soname in the shared libs. Do you really want to
ship them? I think it is very wrong.
I've added a patch to use .0 soname. Thoughts? I've mentioned the issue
upstream, but it seems a bit above their heads.
The octave define at the beginning should be ameliorated, I get,
without octave-devel:
$ rpmbuild -ba GMT.spec
sh: octave-config: command not found
sh: octave-config: command not found
sh: octave-config: command not found
sh: octave-config: command not found
sh: octave-config: command not found
sh: octave-config: command not found
sh: octave-config: command not found
error: Failed build dependencies:
octave-devel is needed by GMT-4.2.1-2.i386
Redirected stderr to /dev/null.
I propose to have xgridedit in a separate package, to avoid depending
on the X libs.
Okay.
less is detected at build time and used in the GMT script at runtime.
Fixed
There are many config files in %_datadir that cannot be overriden by
the user. They should be in %_sysconfdir and marked %config(noreplace).
Added.
Also I have a sed substitution to correct the doc path in the GMT
command.
Added.
I suggest adding INSTALL='install -p' to the make install command to
keep timestamps as much as possible.
Done.
Also during install, cp is called as cp -r for installation of data.
I would suggest either substituting cp -r to cp -pr, redoing the install
or doing a patch for the Makefile to keep timestamps.
Added patch
I suggest doing in %prep:
chmod a-x src/ps2raster.c src/mgd77/mgd77sniffer.c
Fixed.
pslib is a badly choosed name, it could interfere with other library names.
I did:
# rename the pslib man page
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man3/pslib.3
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man3/GMT_pslib.3
It doesn't conflict at the moment. Perhaps better to work with upstream to get
it renamed?
The examples should certainly be %doc, even if they are in a separate
package, since they are really %doc, and we don't want them to be
installed if docs are excluded.
Sure.
The html docs should be in the main package, they are very small.
Done. I had thought they were duplicates before.
The src/*/README.* should also be in %doc.
I think that it would be better to have a %dist tag.
Oversight (from all the other noarch GMT packages).
I think that the examples should have a
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
such that there cannot be any mismatch which could cause the examples
to fail.
Fixed.
I propose adding to main package
%doc gmt_bench-marks
added
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/GMT.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/GMT-4.2.1-3.fc9.src.rpm
* Tue Apr 28 2008 Orion Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4.2.1-3
- Remove unfree source
- Split out xgridedit into sub-package
- Add BR and R on less
- Redirect octave-config stderr to /dev/null
- Move config files to /etc/GMT
- Use install -c -p to preserve timestamps
- Use cp -pr to copy share data
- Add sonames to shared libraries
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444315] mousetweaks - Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: mousetweaks - Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444315 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 13:47 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mousetweaks Short Description: Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop Owners: mclasen Branches: devel, F-9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 254057] Review Request: e16-docs - Dcumentation for Enlightenment, DR16
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: e16-docs - Dcumentation for Enlightenment, DR16 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=254057 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 13:55 EST --- New updated package: - fonts already in bitstream-vera-fonts, symlink - fix typo in summary spec: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/e16/e16-docs.spec srpm: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/e16/e16-docs-0.16.8.0.1-2.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444625] Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444625
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:26 EST ---
Some review checks:
+ rpmlint of source package ok.
+ Local buid works fine.
+ Copyright ok
- I think the whole documentatioon should put into %{_docdir]/GMT
- What is the task of the all subpackage which doesn't contain any files.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444601] Review Request: pem - Pem is personal expenses 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: pem - Pem is personal expenses manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444601 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:30 EST --- Kushal, I would be happy to review this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444235] Review Request: djview4 - DjVu viewer
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: djview4 - DjVu viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444235 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:32 EST --- *** Bug 374621 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444574] Review Request: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message
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: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444574 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:36 EST --- If you set the fedora-review flag to '?', the ticket will not show up on the list of pending reviews and it will most likely sit around forever without receiving attention. That flag should only be set by the reviewer when the review starts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444574] Review Request: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message
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: pidgin-lastfm - Display informaiton form Last.fm profile in Pidgin status message https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444574 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:44 EST --- Oh, ok. I didn't get that :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 436637] Review Request: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image
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: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436637 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:51 EST --- However I wonder if we can move disktype to sbindir instead of bindir: from the disttype man: . Note that running disktype on device files like your hard disk will likely require root rights. We usually move this kind of app to sbindir I don't think it should be in sbindir. The FHS says that /usr/sbin is for non-essential binaries used exclusively by the system administrator. disktype doesn't fall into that category. The main reason I use disktype is for examining ISO images, which I don't think is an administrator-only task. Compare with commands like isosize or volname; they go into /usr/bin. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 435576] Review Request: ncdu - Ncurses disk usage
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: ncdu - Ncurses disk usage https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435576 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 14:59 EST --- Changing bug title to reflect new package summary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 435576] Review Request: ncdu - Text-based disk usage viewer
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: ncdu - Text-based disk usage viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435576 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ncdu - |Review Request: ncdu - Text- |Ncurses disk usage |based disk usage viewer -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444625] Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444625
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 15:23 EST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
- I think the whole documentation should put into %{_docdir]/GMT
Possibly. The GMT install script would make the following subdirs:
pdf
man
web
tut
I could see tutorial going in doc/tutorial. As for html, can web servers serve
content out of /usr/share?
- What is the task of the all subpackage which doesn't contain any files.
%packageall
Summary:All documentation for GMT
Group: Applications/Engineering
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Requires: %{name}-pdf = %{version}-%{release}
Requires: %{name}-html = %{version}-%{release}
Requires: %{name}-tutorial = %{version}-%{release}
to bring in all doc packages in one shot.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444315] mousetweaks - Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: mousetweaks - Mouse accessibility support for the GNOME desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444315 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 15:58 EST --- Done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:03 EST --- You missed one: rubygem-activeldap.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activeldap-0.10.0/examples/al-admin/test/run-test.sh 0644 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 286851] Review Request: kaya - A Statically typed, imperative programming-language
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: kaya - A Statically typed, imperative programming-language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=286851 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:12 EST --- Yes, that does build. I believ this is very close now; just a few bits left. First, some compiler flag issues: Could you explain the CFLAGS bit in %build? It seems to have no effect. This package just seems to do its own random stuff with compiler flags, which is troubling. It ignores the ones we pass to the configure call, but that can at least superficially be fixed with this hack at the end of %prep: sed -i -e 's/^\(EXTRAGCCOPTS=\).*$/\1%optflags/' \ -e 's/^ EXTRAGCCOPTS.*stack-protector.*/ true/' configure.ac Things still build with this hack (and the test suite passes) but it seems that these options get passed through to the compiler itself and that causes a pile of warnings (and the debuginfo package still comes out empty when enabled, which strangely, means it has even less data than it would without this hack). So, if the standard compiler flags don't work, could you document that somewhere? Could you also document the need to disable the debuginfo package instead of just disabling it? Random hacks like that need some sort of comment in the specfile. The documentation is about 60% of the size of the package. Some basic manpages are useful but I'm not sure it's worth putting all of the development documentation in with the main package. Have you considered splitting it out to a subpackage? * source files match upstream: 1c8a817d6435475793e6d662c96c04d68b894b4602d3e65f25291938e955332e kaya-0.4.0.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. ? compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: kaya = 0.4.0-4.fc9 = libgc.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit) libgcrypt.so.11(GCRYPT_1.2)(64bit) libgmp.so.3()(64bit) libncurses.so.5()(64bit) libpcre.so.0()(64bit) libreadline.so.5()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) libutil.so.1()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) * %check is present and all tests pass. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. ? documentation is pretty large; maybe a separate -doc package would be useful. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:17 EST --- Thanks for the feedback ! I have adressed most of the above in this new snapshot: http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-2008-04-29-1.src.rpm I was wrongly installing libSynopsis.so.0.11 with INSTALL_DATA, not INSTALL_PROGRAM. In my local tests (using mock) I still see errors for all the extension modules, as they end up with 0775 permissions, instead of 0755. Are you not seeing those ? Is that a local problem with my mock installation ? umask defaults to 0002, which results in libs with 0775 permissions. When I set 'umask 0022' I get the correct permissions in a normal build / install. rpmbuild appears to invoke 'umask 0022', too, but those files still appear to be group-writable, i.e. have 0775 permission. If all looks good on your side I'll just declare this to be some local corruption, though. Thanks PS: If I make an official release in the coming days, will that be able to ship as part of the upcoming Fedora 9 ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444366] Review Request: deco - Extractor for various archive file formats
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: deco - Extractor for various archive file formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444366 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:23 EST --- Thanks Patrice, Are these items that need to be worked on (or patches accepted) upstream before this package can be approved? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:25 EST --- Fixed the last script. Ran rpmlint to make sure no other scripts were missed. Spec: http://mcpierce.dyndns.org/~mcpierce/rubygem-activeldap.spec SRPM: http://mcpierce.dyndns.org/~mcpierce/rubygem-activeldap-0.10.0-8.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 436637] Review Request: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image
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: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436637 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:27 EST --- Nicolas, I can see that I'd need to have a BuildRequires for openssl-devel (for now at least) to have openssl.pc available. However zlib-devel doesn't provide a zlib.pc - so pkg-config gives me this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ pkg-config libewf --cflags Package zlib was not found in the pkg-config search path. Perhaps you should add the directory containing `zlib.pc' to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable Package 'zlib', required by 'libewf', not found So it seems to me that even if libewf-devel is updated to depend on openssl-devel, pkg-config still won't work for libewf because of zlib. i guess it will be removed on the next libewf bugfix update Did you mean added instead of removed ?! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
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: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:48 EST --- Good: - rpmlint checks return: rubygem-activeldap.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 42, tab: line 10) Safe to ignore, since you're working with upstream to fix the generation script. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines (general and ruby) - license (GPLv2+) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (7aeaf58a819357bdf2044fd664db420d40aa15dd) - package builds on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 441027] Review Request: openoffice.org-ooolatex - Support for embedded LaTeX in Impress/Writer documents
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: openoffice.org-ooolatex - Support for embedded LaTeX in Impress/Writer documents Alias: ooolatex https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441027 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:54 EST --- openoffice.org-ooolatex-4.0.0-0.5.beta2.fc8.1 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443310] Review Request: xfwm4-theme-nodoka - Nodoka theme for xfwm4
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: xfwm4-theme-nodoka - Nodoka theme for xfwm4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443310 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:58 EST --- xfwm4-theme-nodoka-0.1-1.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 442295] Review Request: thunar-shares - Thunar file manager extension to share files using Samba
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: thunar-shares - Thunar file manager extension to share files using Samba https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442295 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:56 EST --- thunar-shares-0.10-1.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443249] Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles
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: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443249] Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles
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: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:56 EST --- Review done on -2. Bad: - license in SPEC does not match code Code is under MIT, spec says GPLv2+ or Ruby. Good: - rpmlint checks return: rubygem-hoe.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 37, tab: line 7) Safe to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines (generic and ruby) - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (5f147e5b098f1615d387c8c4ebe68ee740d30a8e) - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Show me a SRPM/SPEC with the license fixed and I'll approve. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 431277] Review Request: ocfs2-tools - programs for managing Ocfs2 file systems
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: ocfs2-tools - programs for managing Ocfs2 file systems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431277 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:01 EST --- ocfs2-tools-1.3.9-7.20080221git.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 436716] Review Request: tinyproxy - A small, efficient HTTP/SSL proxy daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tinyproxy - A small, efficient HTTP/SSL proxy daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436716 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:00 EST --- tinyproxy-1.6.3-2.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update tinyproxy'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-3411 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443195] Review Request: pAgenda -A cross platform calendar and scheduler
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: pAgenda -A cross platform calendar and scheduler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443195 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:01 EST --- pAgenda-3.2-2.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update pAgenda'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-3416 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443250] Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations
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: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:04 EST --- Review on -2: Good: - rpmlint checks return: rubygem-rubyforge.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 41, tab: line 7) rubygem-rubyforge.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rubyforge-0.4.4/lib/rubyforge.rb 0644 - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines (generic and Ruby) - license (GPLv2+ or Ruby) OK, text not in package, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (a955f92ebbb47953cc7f8428d3f168506cc4) - package builds on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Please fix the non-executable-script error in a new SRPM/SPEC and I will approve. You may also want to advise upstream to properly license their code, only one file seems to mention the license, and the text of the license is not included in the Gem. This is not a blocker for Fedora inclusion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437694] Review Request: bip - IRC Bouncer
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: bip - IRC Bouncer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437694 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437694] Review Request: bip - IRC Bouncer
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: bip - IRC Bouncer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437694
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:07 EST ---
One very minor thing, instead of:
rm -rf %{buildroot}/usr/share/doc/bip
Please use:
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_defaultdocdir}/bip
Why?
1. You need to be consistent with $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}. You've
already used $RPM_BUILD_ROOT above this line.
2. _defaultdocdir == /usr/share/doc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444601] Review Request: pem - Pem is personal expenses 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: pem - Pem is personal expenses manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444601
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:07 EST ---
REVIEW for
cd9524c18ca7a86b1063b4b9f2b5c7d1 pem-0.7.1-1.fc9.src.rpm
OK - MUST: no output from rpmlint
OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package
OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines
FAIL - SHOULD: %description should end with a dot
OK - MUST: licensed with a Fedora approved license (GPLv2 only)
OK - MUST: license field in the spec file matches the actual license
OK - MUST: package includes a copy of the license text which is correctly
installed in %doc
OK - MUST: spec file is written in American English
OK - MUST: spec file is legible
OK - MUST: source matches upstream
FAIL - MUST: source URL is wrong. Source0 should be
http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz and URL
http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/
OK - MUST: package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64.
OK - MUST: no ExcludeArch since this package is noarch
OK - MUST: all build requirements are listed in BuildRequires
OK - MUST: no locales to care about
OK - MUST: no shared lib to care about
OK - MUST: not relocatable
OK - MUST: no directories to own
OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing
OK - MUST: permissions on files are set properly
OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
OK - MUST: package uses macros consistently
OK - MUST: package contains code not content
OK - MUST: no large docs
OK - MUST: docs don't affect runtime
OK - MUST: no header files for a devel package
OK - MUST: no static libs
OK - MUST: no libtool archives
OK - MUST: no GUI, so no %{name}.desktop needed
OK - MUST: packages doesn't own files or directories already owned by other
packages
OK - MUST: BuildRoot is properly prepared at the beginning of %install
OK - MUST: all filenames are valid UTF-8
OK - SHOULD: builds in mock
OK - SHOULD: functions as described
OK - SHOULD: Texinfo scriptlets are sane (taken from the wiki)
APPROVED, if you fix the errors. As they are trivial you can do this after the
cvs import but you NEED TO FIX them before build.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437694] Review Request: bip - IRC Bouncer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: bip - IRC Bouncer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437694
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:12 EST ---
Also, this isn't building with the Fedora OPTFLAGS. Making this change will
resolve it:
Before:
make %{?_smp_mflags}
After:
make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443249] Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles
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: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:18 EST --- APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 443250] Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations
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: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:20 EST --- APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 437694] Review Request: bip - IRC Bouncer
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: bip - IRC Bouncer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437694
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 17:16 EST ---
Oh yes, rpmlint says:
bip.src:52: W: macro-in-%changelog doc
bip.src:56: W: macro-in-%changelog configure
bip.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/bip-0.7.2/ChangeLog
Please resolve these three warnings (hint, if you have any %macros in changelog
entries, change them to %%macros). To fix the ChangeLog, do this in %prep:
iconv -f iso-8859-1 -t utf-8 -o ChangeLog{.utf8,}
mv ChangeLog{.utf8,}
Show me a new SPEC/SRPM with all of these items resolved and I'll finish the
review.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 187318] Review Request: mondo
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: mondo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=187318 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:15 EST --- Unfortunately the URL in comment 27 is invalid. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 188445] Review Request: bootconf
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: bootconf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188445 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||mta.com) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:17 EST --- It's been three months since the last comment; is there still interest in this package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444625] Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444625
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:25 EST ---
I think that it would be better to call the package GMT-doc for
consistency with most of the other packages. Also the Group should
be
Group: Documentation
I think that all the docs should be in only one package.
The html docs should not be installed to be served by a web server but
for local browsing.
Also I think that it would be better if the docs were installed in
%{_docdir}/GMT-%{version}/
One think which is not completely clear to me is whether this
package should depend on GMT or not. This is not so clear to me.
Are the examples used in the tutorial or the doc? If so it could depend
on GMT-examples.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 436637] Review Request: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image
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: disktype - Detect the content format of a disk or disk image https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436637 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:31 EST --- Why does libewf.pc Requires: zlib openssl? $ ldd libewf.so.1.0.2 linux-gate.so.1 = (0x0011) libz.so.1 = /lib/libz.so.1 (0x0014a000) libc.so.6 = /lib/libc.so.6 (0x0015d000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x0043a000) The libz dependency could be made Libs.private in the pkg-config file as libewf is linked against it, not the app linking against libewf. About the missing zlib.pc, as a work-around you could create your own, store it somewhere in $(pwd)/foo and point PKG_CONFIG_PATH to it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 444366] Review Request: deco - Extractor for various archive file formats
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: deco - Extractor for various archive file formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444366 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:30 EST --- These issues have to be worked on, but not necessarily upstream. It is better if you submit patches upstream at the same time you use them in the package, but it is not an obligation. Using directly rename and readlink need not to be done upstream since they may be problematic for portability. I would simply do a sed substitution on deco. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438043] Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438043 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:36 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) There is no soname in the shared libs. Do you really want to ship them? I think it is very wrong. I've added a patch to use .0 soname. Thoughts? I've mentioned the issue upstream, but it seems a bit above their heads. I think that it is a bad idea, I explained why on 'On not shipping shared libraries when upstream doesn't' (though it is not exactly the same issue, the same apply) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PatriceDumas -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426883] Review Request: brazil - Extremely small footprint Java HTTP stack
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: brazil - Extremely small footprint Java HTTP stack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426883 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:38 EST --- I'd like an F-8 branch of this to support the F-8 branch of eclipse-epic. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884#c28 Package Change Request == Package Name: brazil New Branches: F-8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:36 EST --- Sure, I don't mind maintaining an F-8 branch. (In reply to comment #26) (In reply to comment #25) Thanks, Mat! Don't forget to take EPIC off the Packaging/Wishlist on the Fedora wiki :) Will do, cheers! The wiki signup page seems to be out of action at the moment. I was advised in #fedora-websites to keep trying, so I will. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:39 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: eclipse-epic New Branches: F-8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438897] Review Request: framewave - Image and signal processing routines
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: framewave - Image and signal processing routines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438897 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 18:40 EST --- Well, the package is trying to carefully build different code for different processors that will be selected at run time (gets compiled multiple times with/without -msse3 -msse2 for example). Generally with scons it looks like you should be able to specify CCFLAGS= on the scons line, but this package appears to override that. I'll poke upstream, but I'm not sure what their response would be. We could patch BuildTools/buildscripts/fwflags_gcc.py to add our flags, but then it wouldn't change dynamically. In the meantime, bumped to the latest version: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/framewave.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/framewave-1.1-0.20080417.1.fc9.src.rpm * Tue Apr 29 2008 Orion Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 1.1-0.20080417.1 - 1.1 17APR08 devbuild - Add BR boost-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426884] Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-epic - Perl Eclipse plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426884 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 19:04 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 426883] Review Request: brazil - Extremely small footprint Java HTTP stack
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: brazil - Extremely small footprint Java HTTP stack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426883 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 19:07 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 254058] Review Request: e16-themes - Themes for Enlightenment, DR16
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: e16-themes - Themes for Enlightenment, DR16 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=254058 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 19:06 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 438043] Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GMT - Generic Mapping Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438043
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 19:14 EST ---
I think that you don't need
-e 's:-%{_datadir} :-%{gmthome} :' \
-e 's:\(shared data.*\)%{_datadir}:\1%{gmthome}:' \
since you have (rightly, in my opinion) set --datadir=%{gmthome}.
Putting the README.* in src seems a bit dangerous to work with
--short-circuit, and also I don't really like putting stuff in
source packages, that's why I prefer putting them in a
specific directory with a specific name like __distribution_docs.
%doc www/gmt/doc/html
is still in examples too.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 188445] Review Request: bootconf
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: bootconf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188445 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 20:09 EST --- Hmmm -- I seem to have missed the January ping. Anyway, please take a look at http://www.courier-mta.org/bootconf/download/bootconf-1.2-1.src.rpm There's no need to wait months for me to respond. Generally, if I'm not heard from in a week, it's time to pester me again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 224271] Review Request: rhts - A system for developing automated tests
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: rhts - A system for developing automated tests https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224271 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 21:51 EST --- I guess I should ping again. Anything happening here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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 234753] Review Request: accerciser - An interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop
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: accerciser - An interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=234753 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||201449 nThis|| Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 21:54 EST --- Well, it's been three months since my last ping. Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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
